National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1878-02-28
looked for in that of FrELD-DEAN, of Massa-


the votes, at elections in cities, by the mayor
and aldermen, or by committee to be ap-
pointed by them, whenever requested to do
so by a certain number Of the voters in any
ward. 1t is the common practice in all the
cities Of the State to have such recount by
the aldermen at every election where the
vote is close and the result uncertain. The
testimony in the DEAN-FIELD case shows
that the count which takes place in the
wards is seldom found to be correct; II is
almost always altered and corrected by the
more deliberate and accurate counting Of
the aldermen. The law requires the ballots
to be scrupulously preserved, sealed up, and
sent by designated officers to the city clerk,
and forbids the making any final returns
until after the period allowed for petitions
to recount shall have elapsed. II then pro-
vides that the aldermen shall alter and
amend the ward returns according TO the
result of their recount, and that these altered
returns shall stand as the true returns of the
election.
It is the practice in Massachusetts, to
count the votes during the election and be-
fore the polls are closed. While some of
the ward officers are receiving votes, others
are taking them out of the boxes and count
ing them from time to time, so that the
result is usually announced very soon after
the voting ceases The counting is done
during the confusion of the election, nd is
almost necessarily inaccurate, Us experience
proves. The count said 10 have been made
by the United States supervisors was also
made d ling the time of deposting the
votes and was virtually the same count,
and subject to the same errors and uncer-
taintics rs that OF the ward officers. There
were not less than twenty-five names on
each ticket voted at the election in question.
Electors for President and Nice-Presidcnt
of the United States, Governor, and other
State officer, and members Of the Legisla-
ture, were all named on the same tickets.
II is plain that the counting Of these votes
during thg hurry aud confusion of election
day WIS no easy task, and was naturally
subject to errors aud mistakes. Hence the
law OF Massachusetts provides for u dclib-
crate recount of the votes by the aldermen,
or by committee OF their body.
In the DEAN-fIELD ease the committee
Of Aldermen was appointed before the
election and in preparation for it. That
committee consisted of two Democrats and
one Republican. No one who knew any
thing of the facts has ever questioned the
fairness and impartiality Of that committee
] h.. NJ law
requires the Aldermen to alter the ward
returns in accordance with their recount,
and makes these altered figures the only
true returns. The ward returns are Oblitc-
rated, and these are the only official re-
turns.
1t is not true that any one denies the
power Of the House of Representatives to
20 behind these amended returns, which
are made final by the law. On the contra
ry, Mr. FIELD himself freely admits the
right of his contestant to show any frauG
or error in the recount of the aldermen
he denies only that this recount can be
held erroneous because it differs from the
count OF the ward officers, which it super
scdcs. The testimony in the ease prove.
incOntestibly the careful and perfect pre-
scrvalion of the ballots as required by Law
and the accurate and impartial recountinl
of them by the aldermen. No shadow o
sus picion has becn>thrown on any part o
these transactions, and the result as Ger
titled by the aldermen stands wholly I'M
impeachcd by any testimony in the case
But the action of the aldermen is said +
have been illegal and void, because III
petitions OH which they made the rccoun
are alleged TO DC indtinitc and insufficient
This is a mere bubble. These petitions wcr
in the usual form, as the aldermen them
selves certify, and the proof shows. In til
contested case of Judge ABBOTT in the las
Congress, u part of the votes in his distric
were recounted on petitions precisely simi!a
to these, and committee of the Legislator
of Massachusetts,, in Il report filed by tn
contestant in this case, allcge that ii is til
practice in all the cities of the State to &C
on petitions far less formal and precise thai
these. This practice is approved by tn
committee, and the report received by III
Legislature and thus confirmed by tn
highest authority.
There is no analogy in the recounting G
votes by the aldermen of cities in Mnssl
chusetts to the proceedings of the returning
board of Louisiana. The province of tn
aldermen is simply TO verify the counting {
ballots, which the law requires to be scrr
pulously sealed up and preserved for tina
purpose. The returns are TO be cOrrectc
, by an examination Of the actual vote
; which the ward officers must carefully sal
, init to them. In this case all the officer
testify that they obeyed the law strict!
: and returned every ballot TO the aldermc
to be rccountcd by them, and there is nc
one word of contradictory testimony. Thcr
is no shadow OF foundation for the insinu.
ton that the ballots had been tampere
with between the two counts" No su,
picion of the kind has been uttered by an
witness. In short, there is not the lea'
, doubt that Mr.. FIELD received the majOrit
of the votes and was fairly elected.
The contest as it stands at present is d
, fcrent from what it was originally, for I'll
main ground of Mr.. DEANS contest in til
beginning was the twenty-five votes ca,
for Mr.. FIELD by mistake of the print'
calling his district the fourth instead of I'll