The Indianapolis journal., 1884-02-05
A Few Extracts from the Evidence-What
Mr.. Shoemaker Knows About the
Quality of Printing Paper.
No Question in theC Except as to the
Legality Of the Ticket-Paper.
Remarkable Sharpness of Vision Claimed by
Ex-senator McDOnald-A Case That Re-
solves Itself Into Farce

English-Peelle contested election has been
printed, and will be ready for the consideration
of the committee on elections at any time after
tomorrow. There are several very racy pieces
of evidence in the matter presented by Mr.
Peee. Among the more choice morsels is that
relating to the wagers that were placed on the
success of Mr. English by his friends before the
election, and the consequent interest they feel
in his triumph in the contest. 1t is pretty gem
orally understood that the Only Democrats in the
district who are pressing the contest in the inter
est of Mr.. English are those who bet on Mr.
English, and who are anxious, of course, to win
their wagers. But they forget that the bets
were made on the result of the election, as
shown by the returns ana not on what a Demo
cratic House would do in the premises. This
version of the case is supported by the
testimony of some of the leading wit
nesses for Mr.. English as, for instance, John c.
Shoemaker, presideat of the indianapolis Sent-
mel Company the leading Democratic paper in
the State, who was a witness in the case for Mr.
English, and who, on cross examination by Mr.
Peelle, was asked: Had you any bet on the re-
suit of that Congressional electionl' He an
swered: 81 believe will decline to answer that
question"
And further, when asked if the columns of his
paper were not more literally used to secure Mr.
English's election than any other candidate on
the ticket, answered thatit was probably so.
jackson Landers, Charles NJ. Cooper, and 9TH
ers declined to answer whether they did not have
q wager on Mr. English
Here is an extract from Mr.. Shoemaker's cross
examination on the subject:
Q.-What is your poltiesl Al am Demo
Q.-You are manager of the indianapolis Sen
tinel, are you notl A.-Yes, sir.
Q.-The leading Democratic paper in this
Statel Al don't know about it being the lead
ing paper. 1t is a Democratic paper
$50 regarded by the Democratic party, is it
not2 Al shall not say that.
, Q.-It is the leading Democratic paper pub
lished in the city of Indianapolisl Al sup
pose it is regarded
Q-The columns of that paper were pretty
literally used III the last election for the ad-
vancement of Mr.. English for Congressl A
Reasonably so, guess
Q-Was it not more so for him than any other
candidate on the Democratic ticket A.-That
is probably So
Q.-Had you any bet on the result of that con-
gressional elections Al believe l will decline
to answer that question
But to the questions i'll the contest: Mr. En-
glish claims that the paper upon which the Re
publican ticket was printed was not, as the
statutes require, ''plain white paper" because
it was of unusual weight for election tickets
and that it was what is commonly known as
western plate paper" and, in support of this
theory of his case, he introduced five principal
expert witnesses who testified that it was what
was known in the trade as "Western plate
paper. Mr. Shoemaker, of the Sentinel, also
testified, as to the subject of paper, that the
ha4,4 tha
cratic. and National tickets was in the weight of
the paper, and that with little practice he
could tell the difference, by feeling, between the
National and Democratic tickets, as the Demo-
cratic ticket was even some heavier than the Ma
tional ticket. But this is exactly what he did
say:
Q.-I will ask you to take the National ticket
and the Democratic ticket that you have been
talking about and state the difference between
those two tckets-I mean the quality of the pa
per and the weight A.-Well, l should think
they were both book paper. 1t is a close ques-
tion with whether the National ticket is or
not. The Democratic ticket clearly is. l guess
they both probably would be regarded as book
paper
than the National ticket A.-Yes, sir; it is some
heavier. l should think it would be five to six
pounds or six to eight TO the ream. That is
mere guess,
Q-Can you distinguish the Democratic ticket
from the National ticket by the feeling of it!
A.-With a little practice l think l could.
Q.-Cannot you now, without practicel A
Yes, can now
Q-Dont you feel that the Democratic ticket
is little smoother and more compact! Al
would distinguish it more from the thickness of
it than 'yhe other.
Q-Is it not fact that the Democratic ticket
is a little smoother and more compact Al
don't think it is.
Q-Is there not finer finish on the Demo
cratic ticket than on the National ticket Al
would not like to say that there was. / think
the chief difference in the paper is in the weight
Q.-Do you say that with reference to the Re
publican ticket Democratic and National tick
etsl Al think the chief difference is in the
weight. l am not a paper-maker
Q-Can you distinguish the Democratic ticket
from the Republican ticket by feeling, without
reference to its thickness in the finish2 Can
you telll A.-On the finish alone, without any
reference to thickness am not prepared to say
that l could
1t will be seen that Mr.. Shoemaker was not
willing to testify that he was able to distinguish
the Republican from the Democratic ticket be-
cause of any difference in the finish of the two
papers, but merely ON account of the difference
in weight. This is important when it is consid-
cred that plate paper only becomes so by virtue
of its finish, being highly sized and supercal-
endered paper To meet this question in the
case, Mr. Peelle put on the witness stand such
men as Mr.. Salisbury, paper manufacturer; Mr..
Anderson, the wholesale paper dealer; Colonel
Merrill, wholesale book dealer; A. B. Clark, for
over twenty years connected with the house of
Bowen, Stewart e. Co., Mr.. Elijah Halford man
aging editor of the Journal c. l.. Divine, foreman
of the journal; Colonel Ruckle, fornan of the
Journal Publishing Company; Frank Smith
job printer; Sexton & Jaques, job printers; h.