The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1890-06-26

This pepper IS democratic IN principles
and Is Independent in its vieaCs on all
local questions.
Mr.. yredenburgh's Theory of the
Ballot Frauds.
Mr.. James B. Vredenburgh made q
mastery speech yesterday in favor OF
the indicted ballot box suffers. If
anything may a v them, assuredly it
is his ingenuity and responsiveness.
Mr.. Vredenburgh is indeed a foeman
worthy of Mr.. Winfield's steel, and if
in spite of his efforts the trial results
in conviction, Mr.. Winfield's honors
will be all the weightier for the oppo-
sition which he must overcome in
winning them.
But while conceding the ability of
Mr.. Garretson's address, while con-
ceding ven that in matters of detail
he made one on two unassaila BILE
points against the prosecution, still
his statement does not affect our
opinion of the merits of the case, nor
does it alter our expectations as to
what the outcome will be. The theory
of the defence as laid down by Mr..
Vredenburgh is that the irregulari-
ties, which he admits, were the result
of mistake and accident; that in some
cases no real irregularity exists, but
that mistakes of spelling and bad PEN
manship have given to perfectly reg
ular occurrences an irregular appear
ance. The chapter of accidents, too,
was against this precinct, for the ball
lot box would not work for two or
three hours, and a starch box had to
be used instead.
All this is assuredly plausible, and
supported by a certain array OF evil
denee, Mr.. Vredenburgh's theory
might be made have much import
ance in the eyes of the jurors. The
case is one Of those in which the re-
suit will depend on the balancing of
probabilities. Neither side can prove
its case clear home. The State stands
on the theory of conspiracy and the
deliberate preparation Of Illegal acts.
1t cannot produce a witness who
saw the criminal bargain ratified.
But it proves its case-if it
does prove it-by creating IN over
whelming probability. 1t shows that
non-residents' names were voted on;
that persons known to the election
officers were personated by other per-
sons who voted on their names; that
votes were recorded in the names of
dead men; that name were recorded
from vacant lots and stables; that a
vast number Of joker ballots were re-
ceived and counted as good votes,
though obviously irregular; that there
were vastly more votes counted and
returned than were recorded on the
poll book. Then the State asks the
jury is it credible that these things
could all have happened within one
short day, and been allowed to pass
unnoticed through mere carelessness,
or ignorance, or stupidity2 Does not
such d proposition pass human credul-
ity, the State asks, and since amy one
OF these foul men must have noticed
these things, and since it was the duty
Of anyone who noticed them to raise
opposition is it not beyond all reason
able doubt that they agreed to Lei
these so-called irregularities pass so as
to vitiate the true vote of that cleo
iion precinct-in other words, did not
they enter into a conspiracy?
Mr.. Garretson, on the contrary, asks
is it conceivable that these men would
have left so many proofs Of their
crime il they had really conspired &c
commit one2 He asks if it snot more
easy to believe that they Numbered
and erred and were careless, and that
many lamentable results have flowed
from their stupidity and slipshod
methodist
There is the issue ais it will present
itself to the mind Of every juror. Al
between these opposing arrays o
probabilities, which PREVAILS For
newspaper to point out the relatiy'
weights Of the several elements, wouls