Daily Tombstone epitaph., 1886-02-24
PAUL VS. SHA w.
An Outline of Facts In NeiatiOn to
 thts celebrated Case.

I s"tS V oSU' This celebrated case has excited great
 interest, not only in Arizona, but, indeed,
 throughout the west. Everyone in this
 section of Arizona remembers how
 Eugene o. Shaw was declared by the
 Pima county election board to have been
 duly chosen by the people of that county
 to fill the important office of sheriff, how
 his opponent Robert H. Paul, filed his
 complaint in the district court, in and
 for Pima county, Jukge Fitzgerald pre- siding, to contest Shaw's election; how the court, notwithstanding the objections of Shaw's counsel, admitted in evidence the ballots cast at Tucson precinct, al though correlative testimony showed that they had not been in the custody of their legally appointed guardian; how, upon a recount of those ballots, Paul gained eight votes and Shaw lost seven, as com pared with the duly attested original returns.
 The proceedings briefly recited above are familiar to readers of the EPITAPH, but few have known of the utter suprise experienced by Shaw and hls friends when the result of the Tucson re- count was made known. Unable, at the trial, to controvert that recount, and be- lieving that gross fraud had been com mitted, but utterly unable to prove it during the contest, Shaw and his attsr- neys have been engaged in indefatiga- ble endeavors to ferret out the persons and the means used by those men to de- prive citizen of the gift of his consttu- ents and to produce an abortion of justice.
 It remained, however, for the United States grand jury, whose session con tinued from September 2S, to October 3I, 1885, to consummate the investigations instituted by Mir. Shaw. Indictments were found against Henry Barron and M. w. Brady, Robert H. Paul and George T. Martin; the two first named being charged with larceny and destruc- tion of ballots cas. at the general election held November 4, 1884, while the two latter were charged with conspiring to steal and destroy those ballots. The parties have not yet been tried.
 During the month of January, Martin and Barron made affidavits confessing their complicity in this transaction, and the state of facts so developed is the ground upon which Mir. Shaw bases his motion for new trial. Briefly, the ale gations of the several affidavits filed in support of the motion are these: Alter the election returns had been canvassed and Mir. Paul realized his defeat, Harry Barron, barber of Tucson, who had been an ac- tive Paul worker, proposed that the pack age of ballots be procured and the tickets changed so as to give Paul majority. This package was deposited on the cleo tion evening by the judge of election, w. A. McDermott, in an empty, unlocked drawer of a wholesale mercantile house. The affidavits state that the key of this store was procured by M. w. Brady, who, with Barron, removed the ballots to the Sheriff's office and in the presence of Paul, altered sufficient votes to change the present result of the election as to shrievalty, afterwards calling for con test and recount, which ended in plae- ing Paul in office, to the exclusion of Shaw.
 Next Saturday, the a7th, has been fixed by Judge Barnes as the time for settlement of statement, on motion for new trial, and our courthouse will doubt lesf be well filled by citizens, who take an interest in the contest.
 An EPITAPH reporter called at the Occidental Hotel yesterday, upon Messrs King & Dungan, attorneys for E. O. Shaw, and from them it was ascertained that no argument as to the motion for new trial would be heard here, unless a jurisdictional question should be raised by Mir. Paul's attorneys.