The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1885-10-28
YESTERDAYS sCOUNDRELIsM.

ing open ballot-box in custody OF court OF
justice leaves no doubt Of partisan scoundrel-
ism. The act was more Infamous than
burglary, more destructive of law and
order than highway robbery, striking
as it did, at the life and source Of all
this rufianly proceeding must eventuate in
incalculable harm to all the people. Partisan
cutthroats and saloon bummers have come to
believe that they can do as they please with
elections, corrupting them in the process of
voting and altering the ballots after they are
cast At Chicago, two of these villains are
out of the penitentiary to-day on the most
trivial and senseless technicalities, after hav
ing been righteously sentenced to the States
prison for the highest political crime possible
in elections. There are men at large in In
dianapolis to-day who, only few months
house and destroyed ballots in Gus
tody of the proper official. Lieutenant
Mullen, of Cincinnati, is in the enjoyment of
freedom and of public office by virtue of the
intercession Of the President upon representa-
ton Of Jealous partisans, after he had served
part of his sentence for having kept scores
of legal voters from exercising the right Of
suffrage. And in that same city now there is
evidence of the most stupendous frauds in
the late election. The registry was corrupted
by the addition of hundreds of illegal names,
and, as if this were not fragrant enough hun
dreds of fraudulent votes were piled on top of
the fraudulent registry. So impudent and
SO fagitious were these frauds that those per-
petrated in a single election precinct were
enough to change the complexion Of the cleo
ton of the county, casting over 65, 900 votes
And now we have again, in Indianapolis, an
attack on the ballot box, and it is broken open
in manner suggestive of burglary and pos
sible only under the direction of fellow like
"Sim" Coy, bullying statesman of the pot
house kind.
What is to be done about this impudent de-
fance of the courts9 What will Judge Ayres
do to punish these men for the contempt
they have shown his authority A careful re-
count of the ballots had been made, and the
Democratic majority in the commission had
had its own way. At the end of the counting
of each ward the ballots, by mutual consent,
had been carefully returned to their respective
bags and sealed, for the purpose of preserving
them unimpaired for the proper custodian
and for the further pleasure of the court, and
when all had been counted the bags were
locked in the ballot-box. There they were
secure, with one key in the possession of the
Republicans and one in the hands of the
Democrats. The recount had been made
from to lizard, and the result showed,
after the best possible advantages had been
afforded Mr.. Ripley, that his opponent Mr..
Pritchard, still had majority of one, or of
'four or five, as tailed by third party man
present. This would have satisfied any hon.
orable, fair minded man. but it did not please
Although forbidden by law to interfere with
the proceedings, he at once took hand, blus-
tering and threatening like pirate, and soor
bullied his tools, for such they proved them
selves to be, into the unwarranted assault
upon the ballot-box awaiting the decision of
the court.
This is the most audacious outrage that has
ever disgraced the politics of Indiana, and, for
criminal boldness, is step in advance of any,
thing attempted elsewhere. Judge Ayres has
an important duty to perform in rebuking
these fellows. He cannot pass it over with
out bringing all our courts into contempt and
lending encouragement to the lowest elements
in the city in their desperate, unconscionable
assaults upon our election system. His honor
has been most grossly insulted. The men
who are guilty of this thing were intelligent
enough to know that these ballots-every
one of them-were perfectly safe in the box
where they had been placed, and there was no
occasion to proceed without further instruc-
ton from the court. The count had been fin
ished in accordance with the order of the
judge; its result had been declared, and moth
ing remained but to proceed with the further
duty before them under the order of the
court.
The law makes no provision for second
recount, nor for recounts indefinite. Section
4742, r. S., 1881, says: ''Said clerk
shall, as soon as said recount is completed,
replace said ballots in the ballot boxes, Sc
curely lock and seal them, and keep them as
above provided" This was exactly what was
done at the end of the count of Monday night,
and out of his cI,stod L