New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1890-06-15
OF ELECTION CONTESTS


LAyGsToy ELECTED - COST
OF ELECTION CONTESTS
Try ryIrGRArH TO THE ThIBCSE.i
Washington June 14-OwinG 10 'i'o -
Of Judge Houk Of its members U' ,os.oa
,,t,e ON Elections did not dispose oil the contested
,.,o oe NJ Hill against Catchlngs, kernehan
,. ,,oo,or and Goodrich against Bullock, a. had
Zen exnected and the formal decision VIII ho' po
given until Tuesday. There Is "o Ie">o" " ''.
- that the verdict in these will be as indicated
=, nm. rr,hune OF Wednesday. There is gronnd Tor a
.a.1on,b,e suspicion that the minority Of the com
,,,se is not dealing with the majority in good faith
.h., without openly avOwing its purpose the con
,cron is 10 DELAY as long practicable. decision
g., the remaining cases in the hope OF leaving some
NJ them on the calendar when Congress adjourns
The cases of LangSton against Ncnable. OF the iNth
Virginia District and Miller against Elliott OF the
,.r,,r soutb Carolina District, decided by the
committee many DAYS ago. and the reports IN both
cases are ready he submitted to the House nut te
views Of the minority" in neither case are READY Ior
admission Colonel OFerrall. who Is 70 iorhnF''o
the views" in the former case, asked for delay OH
the plea of indspos on," and ii was granted Win
the Understandings it is said. that in lieu OF II me
Miller Elliott case should be called up ana ulspo>cu
of next week. To this. OF course, ElAo' nerposo"
q strong objection on the ground of lack Of time for
proper preparation. The result Is tha' hcl'Ier .a0
wi
intention now is TO press both cases t" conclusion
during the following weak, beginning WIN uo
Langston Vcnablc case on June "a
II is asserted that in order TO defeat the decidhg
NJ these cases the Democrats will resort to the deS
perate expedient of flight. If they do ths thes Gun
cause some trouble and waste Of precious tilne u-
less Republican absentees will return TO Washington
and attend TO their duties. In both the cases ro-
ferred 10 the contestants colorcd men, who rep
resent southern districts, and II il 10 be expected
that the Democratic opposition to them VIII nc even
more bitter and stubborn than 1t would be If they were
white
The report in the Langston- venable case has been
prepared by Mr. Haughen who has spent several weeks
An a patient and thorough sitting Of The testimony
Although new member of the Elections Committee,
Mr.. Haughcn has done excellent work. ana mas luly
established himself in the confidence of his colleagues
His report in the pending gives evidence oil care
full and searching investigation and IT'S conclusions
undoubtedly will be approved by the House. from
the report appears that the colored voters OF the
district were substantially unit for Lang,ton, and
that the number Of Coored voters is nearly double
the number OF white voters yet Nenable was H'urheo
BY plurality of GAL votes. although white Repub-
lean candidate was credited with 3.201 votes After
citing the state Election law, the report says
1t is very evident from the last two sections quoted
that the law intended that change should be MADE
in the legally constituted board. except Tor me most
urgent reasons; and that men appointed before the
Commencement of heated campaign could alone be
trusted with the important duties Of impartially
TSe fact that on the very eve Of the election it
found convenient or necessary by the Democratic
cnct judges of election known to be friendly to con
testant and filling the vacancies with his bitter op
ponents without any excuse for the change,
is badge Of fraud which cannot be overlooked
The report finds that Langston was deprived OF
Ia votes and VeLabie of 60 votes at one precinct
the return from which rejected by the County
Commissioners for the alleged reason that the same
retilr WED
vice president instead Of for electors. The chief
frauds. however. committed in Petersburg, where
LaHg,tons friends had taken the most pains prevent
fraud. They had agreed that each one should vote
open ticket; that lie should show his ticket 10 one
OF LangstOns friends who kept LIST Of the names OF
men who voted Tor Langston, and who the voter
deposit his ballot in the ballot-box. In the Third
Ward Pa votes thus recorded for Langson, and
the Official count gave him only la vOtes-a steal
of 10 votes. NJ. y. Lewis kept the Langston tally i'll
that ward The report says:
The verify of Mr.. Lewis, books stands unQuestioned
Not one Of the &o4 voters of the Third Ward regis
tered by him is called dispute the fact that he
voted AZ Mr. Lewis testified he saw him vote. Not one
OF the SIX men not registered by the clerks, but whom
Mr. Lewis SAYS lie deposit their ballots, was called
10 testify that he did not vote on that day. THIS
would have been a short and decisive way TO have
impeached the testimony Of Mr.. Lewis, and d
way quickly reSorted 70 by contestee To impeach d
similar record at Columbian Grove, LunenburS County
In that precinct the contestant called witness who
testified that he $50 votes cast for contestant and
gave the names of the voters. Two OF these voters
not vote for contestant.
The committee has permitted the vote OF Columbian
70 10 illustrate the alerness of the cntestce in similar
10 defend the returns by the oath Of the voter
where the facts warranted IL. on REORGANIZATION
Mr.. Lewis was asked 800 questions. covering the
political history Of Virginia for years this did not
corrObOraed and strengthened it, The cross eNamna-
ton began Oh February II. and continued until Feb
yuary 23
In the sixth Ward Of Petersburg the Official count
gave Langston l3o votes he proved that he received
317 votes All of the election officers were Demo
crats-a plain violation of the law Here, as else
where the witnesses for the contestant subjected
20 tedious, frivolous crOss-eXaminatiCn by the con
counsel evidently with the sole object of vast
ing time That is a sort Of Democratic hlibusterng
which every Republican contestant In the South has
had 10 endure; for thus far 10 plan has been de-
viscd prevent it. The following extract from the
report bearing this point VIII be read with interest
1t appears by the record that the contestant
gave notice that the 31st day of January,
1859. he would begin take the dispositions Of
TO as having been called and having sworn mat tiey
voted for him, whise names we're glvel-m0suy
negroes who expected 10 testify that they were
qualified voters and that they cast their ballots for
called and sworn January 81 at IL O'Clock m, was
r.: y Robinson His direct examination was com
gan the same day. January 81. and was prolonged
the a sf gay % the on OF Il
which were useless Irrelevant and frivolous, and in
time
l.. And then occurred an outrage without a parallel
In the history OF election cases inst AS the witness
answered the 3l6th cross question, he was arrested
ana taken INTO custody by Deputy United states
Marshal by virtue % warrant or capias falsely
manclouSY ana without probable cause sued ont
against MIN D( TWO persons. attorneys al, law who
had as counsel iOr the contestee, appeared and par
tcPaNu III INu cross eXaininatOn, upon their com
plant on oath that the witness refused 20 testify I'm
this ''' 80
IN eHaiIihduon OF tnc record shows the absolute
fasity Of this charge. The witness maint,ieG ndor
the most provoking and insulting crosscxamlnaton.
remarkable self possession and dgnined nurtrs, and
the only explanation Of this Outrageous cnndnct "u
the part of contcstee counsel must be- that mo h0ncd
by their perjury to mtimdate other witnesses from
taking the stand 10 expose the frauds nv which their
client obtained the certificate Of cIertinn ~ ~
Having themselves stopped the bv
the arrest OF the witness tey impndentIv Objected IN
the consideration of his testimony fr tho na 1I,av
they had not had dc opportunity N c,nce'oyouin Inc