The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1879-01-23
THE FIGHT IN THE SIXTH.

CONTINUATION OF THE CONTEST BETWEEN
MEssRs HALL AND HATzEL-PoLL CLERKS
/ AND INSPECTORS WITH POOR MEMORIES.
The contest between Messrs. Hall and Hatze who
at the last election the candidates for Alder
the Sixth Senatorial district. being carried
on with considerable vigor by the principals. The
situation present is attempt the part of the
Hatzel faction to get Judge Wandell to entertain
complaint against Messrs. w. f. Hall. Thomas
Boland Michael Murphy and Cornelius Foley
inspectors OF election in the Eleventh Election dis
trict of the Eighth Assembly district-for having.
alleged falsifed the last election night.
1t has been stated under oath by Lawrence Clody and
others that Thomas Boand, chairman Of the Board of
Inspectors in said election district announced the
result of the for District Alderman Hall,
1870; Hatzel, 49, Strack, 70; Kenney, s5; Hook and
Hoffman. each. which were afterward at the same
place and on the same night changed so as to read:
Hall. 2O0 Hatzel, %; Strack. 20; Kenney, 49, Hook
and Hoffman. each. Total. POT. Papers
brought from Police Headquarters and the county
canvassers which showed that such change
had certainly been made; but whether legally
illegally is now under discussion. The effect Of
this change the general result will be better
derstood when is known that the total majority for
George Hall in the ninety-two election districts
If. therefore, Mr. Haze got 93 instead of % in the
Eleventh Election district, the difference to Mr. Hall
would have been about 140 votes-70 gained by Hat
eel being 20 lost to Hall-which would have given
Jacob A. Hatzel about % majority and the Alder
manic seat hence the bitterness OF the present srus
gle and the formidable array Of counsel on both sides
The evidence given by the prosecution thus far
was intended to show that by the poll clerks re-
turns which gave Hall 200. Hatzel %, Strack TO-
Kenney 50 and Hoffman and Hook each. with total
of 207. Mr.. Hall could not have received so many
reply that it was perfectly probable and possible
that he could. eThey say that Hall was on every
So Strack and Hall. 20: Hall and Hatzel, %; Hall.
alone. %; Hook and Hoffman 4. and defective, 3.
Total, POI.
HALL MUST EXPLAIN
When Judge Wandell called the case yesterday. Mr.
Purdy for the accused inspectors, rose and moved
that the complaint be dismissed as untenable. as
nothing had been adduced hitherto to show that
they had fasihed any returns. The paper which had
been brought from Police Headquarters by Chief
Clerk O'Brien, and which purported to be the GER
tcate of election sent by the inspectors to the sta
ton house on election night, and which declared
the vote for Hall 100 and for Hatzel %. was
not in evidence against the accused, could
1t properly be until it was proven that the signatures
said to have been appended to it by the defendants
were genuine The other side had made no attempt
to settle that very important question nor could they
votes, he would say that Mr.. Hals name being all
the tickets it perfectly possible for him to have
obtained more than BOO Further, Mr.. Purdy con-
tended. the Judge when the papers containing the
allegations against the defendants submitted to
him did not think there was enough i'll them to issue
warrant.
Judge wander simply said, in reply to the counsel
for the prosecution, Mr. Waehner, who was about to
oppose Mr.. Purdys motion. ''Mr. Waehner it is not
necessary for you to go AS the matter stands 1
shall ask the other side to explain the apparent dis
c1epancies."
John J. Very the republican poll clerk Of the
Eleventh Election district called to the stand and
testified that he had kept careful tally of the vote
note paper and transferred the tally the off,
cial tally book and footed up the canvass; he
but he did remember that before lie announced the
result OF his tally and addition thereof he heard
Thomas Boland, chairman of the inspectors declare
that Hall had received 100 votes; lie had distinct
remembrance of any other figures, but he knew that
when he himself as poll clerk, few minutes after
Boland statement, announced the result, there
some talk of mistake having been made by some
body; Mr. w. L. Hail had said that Mr.. Hatze had
been credited with more votes than lie was entitled to-
Cross-exalnined by Mr.. Waehner. witness testified
that he could not that either he the other poll
clerk had been found fault with; in fact. the in
and that the had been made by themselves
the witness not prepared to swear to any exact
had no recollection of anything that occurred on the
night of election other than what he had already
told. but he ready and willing to swear that
whatever down his signature in the tally
book right as he sealed the book and delivered
it in person to CHIEF Clerk Orien election night
INSPECTORS MEMORY.
The next witness called w. 4. Hall, the Tam
many inspector OF elections, who had said to Mr..
Boland that mistake had been made. He could not
remember anything. not even who were the Tam
many and who the anti-Tammany candidates; he
recollected that mistake had been made in the Dis
trct Aldermanic canvass by himself or Mr.. Boland.
but he could not tell what way the figures read
or how the result affected by it, he
knew how the mistake had been made; he had
kept q tally sheet Of note paper and
Mr.. Halls tally was SO large that his name had to
be carried down to another place on the paper below
Hatzels. who credited with the formers second
row Of votes. The first line gave Hall 100. the
ond gave him TO- he supposed, but he could not
swear to it. Mr.. Hall persistently denied that he
could remember tny figure or fact connected with
had been made in Hatzeis favor in the return sent
by Mr. Boland to the station house. He HALL went
there to recall it, but could not get it.
The examination was here adjourned until this
morning.