The Portland daily press., 1890-11-13
Every Inch of Ground Contested BY
the Defence.
A Technical Fight on the Matter of
Records.

tue rec0TuS Ol tu6 mcotluS VI august ii.
Mr.. Strout thought that before the record
was read the legality of the meeting should
be shown. The city charter of Biddeford
was introduced to decide this. The court
decided that this point need not be proved.
The record was produced Mr.. Strout noting
an exception that no evidence had been in
troduced showing that the defendants were
aldermen or that the meeting was legally
called. Mr.. Hubbard then read the record,
showing that Aldermen Yates, Roes and Her
sey were present, that voting lists duly at
tested were received from the aldermen, and
that they were verified and ordered posted.
Mr.. Hubbard produced the voting list. He
said that since the list was deposited with
the city clerk 1t had been altered by the
change of over 500 names. Mr.. Dyer offered
certified copy of the original list, but Mr..
Strout objected, saying that since the origi-
nal lists were there. although changed, they
should be presented instead Of the certified
copies. The court ruled that the witness
l might take the original list and point out the
| changes that had been made since August IA,
but that the whole evidence might afterward
| be excluded If it was not found pertinent.
q idhiuE buO 1loto VI CdCu Wdlu III UEutTs MI.
Hubbard showed whether the names of Fleas
Gendron, John t. Beauregard, Saul Sicard,
James F. Stanton, Fred Landre. James Bel
laire, Narcisse Provencal, Alphonse Bolduc,
Nareisse Thiverge, the names named in the
indictment as being falsely registered, had
or had not been altered. Mr.. Dyer then at
tempted to put in the lists of Wards 2, 3, 4, 8
and 6, with the changes indicated, but Mr..
Strout objected. The introduction, in SO far
as they related to the nine men, was allowed
and the several lists were shown to the
Jurors. Mr.. Hubbard then went on to testify
that on the 14th Of August paper purport-
Ing to be list of illegal voters was handed
him in the corridor of the city building by
some one he could not remember, but that he
did not have rescript from the Supreme
Court given him. He said he carried the list
into the aldermen's room and had some con-
versation with the aldermen in regard to it,
There were several others in the room.
One OF the aldermen said that he had had a
copy OF the rescript sent to him, which one
Mr.. Hubbard could not say. Another said,
after looking the list over, there were good
many mistakes in it and that perhaps they
had better call everybody whose name was
doubted up with their papers and settle the
question. Mr.. Hubbard produced the list of
naturalizations of citizens of Biddeford.
Eight of the nine were shown to have held
on the 14th of August naturalization papers
issued out of the municipal court at Biddeford.
| The name of James F. Stanton did not APP
| pear. He then produced the record of the
| organization of the defendants as the board
| of aldermen In March, 1890. Mr.. Strout OBJ
| jected, but the objection was overruled and
| the record was admitted. Mr.. Strout noted
| an objection on the ground that no call for
| the election had been introduced to show
| that it was legal election and that no evil
dence of the election of these defendants had
| been offered.
On cross-examination Mr.. Hubbard read
the warrant of the board for the meeting of
August IA and the directions of the marshal
for posting the same. He repeated his testi,
mony in regard to the reception of the, first
from ss and Carlos
Heard, assessors, on the 18th of August, and
the doings of the board at their meeting on
the 14th. 1t was voted in the forenoon to
certify to the correctness Of the list. The
list of doubtful voters came in at about 4
O'Clock In the afternoon. All the aldermen
said about 1t was that as there were so many
names on the list it would be impossible to
do anything about it in the hour left for the
session. but that at their next meeting, -four
days before the election, they would cite in
the questioned men with their papers and
investigate the matter.
They did not examine the naturalization
record.
Mr.. Strout then asked whether or not they
summoned large number of persons before
them at their meeting four days before cleo
tion. Mr.. Dyer objected because the crime
charged was conspiracy to do wrongful acts
committed on the 14th of August, and any
subsequent action was immaterial in the
case. Mr.. Strout replied that the govern
ment's evidence showed that the aldermen
did the best they could, that they could moi
cite in persons in time for their session OF
the 14tb, and did not care to strike off names
without hearing the parties; hence they de-
cided to bling the matter up and settle it al
their next regular meeting, four days before
election. What he wanted to show was whe
Their or not they so settled it.
Mr.. Dyer rejoined that there was no record
of any action of this kind. and that as the
government had been held strictly to the rec
ord he thought the point should be so con
sidered.
At the opening of the afternoon session
Judge Colt admitted the testimony objected
to by Mr.. Dyer, because it might have some
bearing on the case. Mr.. Hubbard then ties
titled that the summonses were issued in large
numbers. The changes on the check lis
were made on the 80, 4th, 9th and 9th of Sep
TENDER, on 1.-THE four days before election
when the aldermen were la session.
In the case of Gendron Mr.. Hubbard said
his name was on the list August IA but wa:
taken off at the four days session by Gen.
dron's request, Mr. Hubbard read the re-
cord of the vote by which the citations were
issued and gave the proceedings In the cases
of the men named. In the case of Fred
Landre who was subsequently, naturalized
in the United States court, objection was
made to Mr.. Strout's attempt to show this
decentralization because the matter was not
a proper subject for crossEexamination. Sus-
tained. MIR. Dyer drew the fact in rebuttal
that the notices were not returned to the
aldermen and that so far as he knew person
| ally they might not have been delivered to
the persons named.
| John F. Goldthwaite of Biddeford, deputy
sheriff, was then called. He testified that he
served list of doubtful voters on Yates,
Hussey, Roes and Garnache on the 14th of
August at the aldermen's rooms. Yates was
the only one who made any talk about 1t re-
marking that it was the same old chestnut
and wondering what it all amounted to. He
salo that he served copy of the rescript of
tue supreme Court in the Dean case on Yates
hoes and Hussey at the same time 1892 p. m.
ana place. He did not have copies enough
Vi the Tescrlpt to 90 around.
On crosS-examination Mr.. Goldthwaite
testified that Charles II. Prescott gave him
the list of voters and Wilbur F, Limit the
rescript.
Edwin j. Cram. recorder of the Biddeford
municipal court was the third witness for
the government. MIR. Cram produced the
records of naturalization of the men named
in the Indictment OF these seven came in
az minors under the law, one as having filed