The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-01-27

A these arguments apply, we must sit as |
o9 thc on the rights Of each and every one
would Hood the court with the immense amount
OF testimony taken in the lOrmer contest
inc SIX points In the petition as TO tae mis-
cohuucJ OF the election officers have been over and
over brought up In the lower court ia different !
cases, and have over and over been defeated. The
right OF voter is q peculiar one. He is
.s under certain conditions, as, for instance, he
must vote at certain time on a certain dav
must DC OF certain age, and the like II he /
does not vote under these conditlons his vote il !
not eount.aa legal II this is the case for one
voter, II is the sansS for Srecinc. Of voters,
y Illegal votes we're received by the
" os'"ei' ana " :. 75iers 0i another stripe
to prison, there to remain for twenty,iour
hours, and II other irregularities took place.
the participants in them should be punished.
would not do to say that the prooeedlngs ere
legal up to certain point and heyoy ID that
illegal. The legal votes were so CO., cred up by
fraud that they cannot be disc ,vered by any
method. The only way posS ole was to throw
ont the whole precincts. Il the election officers
acted wrongfully, those who had placed them
in Office should suffer for their Illegal pro-
ceedings.
Suppose, for the sake of argument, that the
court has no power to strike out the entire poll,
it cannot be said that the petition ought to be
| quashed because too much was claimed. Nor
can 1t be claimed that il should be so dealt with
| because the petition did not contain the names
| Oh Lile clIlHenb. lneTc were some lSl,VuO VOtcS
east at the election, TO get the names of which
| would be impractcable In former cases IL has
| been deemed to have been unnecessary.
The amendment which was made after the
| petition was under Judgment was occasoned by
| the discovery of false votes affecting Thayer and
Greenbank, by which packages OF ten votes
! were twisted together, and the whole lot sup
| posed to be for one or the other. The order of
| court allowing this amendment was according
| to the strictesL requirements of common law,
and was made at such time rs would allow a
reply from the other side. II was not out of
| time, and the opposite side were not taken by
surprise. 1t was made before the writ of cer-
ti0rdrt was brought into court Such amend
ments have often been allowed in former cases,
and at later times than this one as for instance,
after writs of error
The objection against the reference TO the ex-
aminers comes too late. 1t comes after the case
has been tried, after some two thousand printed
pages of evidence have been taken But the
right to refer to examiners can be proved by
| reference to the statutes of the Courts of Com
mon Pleas and Quarter Sessions. 1t is affirmed
that by statute giving the right of reference to
the Court OF Common Pleas the right is taken
from the Court of Quarter Sessions, because it is
given 10 the former court. This assertion en-
phatcally denied.
The assertion that the case should be tried at
the next term of court, and because 1t was not
80 decided that therefore it was illegal, is also
disapproved by precedents. If this were SO, any
man who has been fraudulently elected might
put off the case until the time was completed,
|
opponents.
The Chief Justice at this point announced
that, on account Of long consultation to be
held this afternoon, the counsel would have tc
suspend his remarks for the present. The court
then adjourned until 10 o'clock tomorrow
NIsi Prius-Iudge Agnow.
Anna Foley vs. John Fagan and Estelle Fagan
An action to recover damages for an alleged
malicious prosecution. Before reported. Or
the part of the defense ii was shown that on the
1st of October last the defendants had $50
which Estelle Pagan placed In writing desk
, In her own bed-chsmber, to which room plain
tiff, who was cook in the house, had free access
on Sunday, the Sd of October, all the family
and servants except the plaintiff were out, and
the money was still in the desk, and on the
Wednesday following the money was missed
note paper which were in the desk Subse
quenty the paper was found In the kitchen in 6
cookbook used by the plaintiff which directed
suspicion against her as the person who ha6
taken the money. A search-warrant being OBJ
l tanned and search made, fifty dollars of the
5 exact denominations of the money which hat
been lost, together with some smaller sums
/ were found in the plaintiffs trunk. The
officer who made the search insisted
t upon placing her at once under arrest, bu
} her employer begged that she nigh
1 not be taken that night, making himself respon
= slble for her appearance next morning. Upor
this state of facts the jury believed that there
A were both probable cause and absence of malice
1 and rendered verdict of not guilty in favor o
| Tue ucltuuhIl, JOIN paSAu, LOe COurb laVlnl
0 at an earlier stage of the case directed the ur,
to find in favor of his co-defendant there being
a no evidence. whatever to implicate her in tn
: alleged malicious prosecution. Palethorp TO
{ | defendant; Ruddiman for defendants.
g District Court, No. 2-Judge Hare.
n Morehouse VS.. Broussin & Rusk. An actor
g to recover for thirty barrels of oil sold and dc
i hvered The defense alleged that the purchas
c was made by only one OF the defendants. o.
G trial 80
= District S}ourt, No. 1-,Iudge streud.
. John Gimer vs.. John D. Carpenter ct al A
8 action to recover damages for the alleged negll
$ gent construction of an alley way. by whic
: plaintiffs property was overfiowed by water an
= greatly injured. Verdict for plaintiff, $175.
0 Joseph Fayct VS.. Isaac Kuhn. An action (
d recover for cheese sold and delivered the de
fense alleging that the cheese was unmarketable
= On trial.
Q Court of Quarter Sessjons-Allison, p. J..
u j. Fox and Henry Stewart were acquitted of
,. charge Of larceny, the evidence being that the
e went to the prosecutors house and took away
u stuffed dog that belonged to Stewart the prose
It cutor having obtained il from the person VIII
q transferred the house to him, and who had r,
3 ceiyed it from Stewart TO do some work upon Il
y This being merely claim of right, and no felC
'S Nous intent entering into the act it. of course
was not the offense of larceny.
In the case of George Walsh, charged wit
II stealing $500 from Patrick Devinney in the Cit
q Bank on last Friday afternoon, the jury rel
a dcred a verdict of guilty.
y WED DING VITATIO
a ENGRAVED IN THR NEWEST AND Bss
NJ LOUIS DRKKA.