Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1890-11-07
The COUNTER CONTEST.
Reclamation Of The Election
Judges.
A WITNESS wANBERs AWAY
He is Sharply Rebnked by III,
Court and Fined.

He is Sharply Rebnked BY Oh
Court and Fined.
Attwo O'Clock yesterday the tax
ing Of testimony was resumed aDC
Mr.. w. w. GUotich, WhOiscted Al
one Of the judges with Mr.. Beaver
testified as to unknown parties vot
ing the names Of the men hereto.or,
mentioned.
The testimony Of the two judges
was fearfully and wonderfully dam.
aging to themselves.
One by one the men who had
had been persousted were put on the
witness stand and testified that they
were absent from Bingham on the
fourth OF August last. This testi-
moDy confirmed what had been
said on the witnes-sstAnd by Barney
Irwin, who hsd been postmaster at
Bingham, ind Pat Pheland, who Is
now a merchant at that place.
Albert Frye, who had been per-
sonated, testified: / was not in
Bingham In August last; at that
time l resided in Alta and voted
there.
w. &. BOrlund, whose vote had
been counted In Bingham, said; i
have been in the employ Of the Rio
Grande Western for TWO years and
was not out Of this city during the
summer months.
Mr.. Beaver, the election Judge Of
poll number three, was recalled, but
failed 10 respond. IL was discovered
that he had suddenly left the court
room. Search was instituted but he
could not he found about the build-
ing. The fact that he had so I'M
tremendously vanished excited aus
piciJn, and deputy marshal was
dispatched to hunt for him. The
officer had been absent about an
hour when he re.urned with the
witness, having accidentally met the
latter on the street. When ques-
toned by the court as 20 why he hae
left without permission, witness re-
piled that he did not know II was
necessary for him TO remain after
having been excused from the wit
ness-stand.
The Court-Are you not aware,
Mr.. Beaver, that when your fees
were paid you. that your services
were due the court for that amount?
Witness-I thought you were done
with me.
The Court (reprovingly)- You
are required 10 be in attendance until
you are notified that you are dis
charged. Where were you and
what did you Intent doing?
Witness-l was going 10 a funeral
and was not a block away any Of
the time.
The COurt-what you say may be
true, but in my opinion you should
TIE riued. addressing counsel for
cOmplainant) What is the cuslo-
mary fine under such circumstan
e..
Mr.. Brown-Usually the witness
fees are forfeited, or witness Is COM
PEELED 10 defray the expense in
hunting him up. Either one or
both Of these fines may be imposed.
The COurt-This matter is serious.
If nothing more, the witness has
been guilty Of infringing vi on valu-
able time Of the Court, and he will
he required TO forfeit his fees and
pay the expense incurred in bring
ing him back, and stand committed
until both Of such fines are paid.
This witness was recalled to the
stand and subjected 20 severe re-exs
Mr.. BrOwn-When YOU were on
the stand this morning / enquired
il you we're acquainted with a man
named Pat Messack and you replied
that YOU were not. / now ask you,
to You know a man by the name Of
Pat Merrick?
Witness (hesitatinglyENes, sir.
Mr.. BrOwn-l have good reason
to believe them n be ore aud the
same person, and | want IN know II
the man Merrick that you know
voted in the name Of Pat Merrick.
wituess-No, sir; it was man
that represented himself as Pat
Merrick, a stranger, personally, to
me.
NJ. Brow II (.ternly There seems
to be n good many strangers, person.
ally to you, who voted for men that
you once knew, but temporarily had
Witness, cross-examined by Judge
Iaofborough-Mr Beaver, do you
not think 10 probable, as well
as possible, that there was more
than one man for each name;
that Is to say two men bearing the
same name for each OF the thirteen
ballots?
Witness-I think 50.
1t was here shown that there was
one vote cast for Fred Ferguson at
the poll IN which Mr.. Beaver was
judge.
The ballot was produced and
Mike Duggan testified: | can identi-
~ the ballot in question, because |
wrote the name Of Fred. upon IL.
did 80 because Mr.. FergusOn's INIT |
name was dimly printed, and hot
being personally acquainted with
the gentleman, but wishing TO vote
for him, | enquired what his name |
was aud was told il was Fred, |
and / therefore wrote that name
Witness here identified his ballot |
and It was offered as evidence that 1t ]
should have been counted for plain (
tih.l
Mr.. Br0wn-Did you have any
with Mr.. Beaver on or
after election day?
Judge LOOfOOrough-We object,
on the ground that the question IL
irrelevant and leading.