, 1891-06-17
RATHER QUEER.
Sensational Suggestions in the
Baird-Ros Case.
Judges of Election Swear they Can,
not Identify Certain Ballots
Because They are Not Wrapped as
they we're When Put in the Box.
Legal Arguments May Suddenly
Terminate the Case Today.

The contested election case of John C.
Baird vs.. U. E. Ross, contestine the
election OF the latter named gentleman as
councilman from the First ward. came up
for consideration in the district court yes
terday before Judge Scott. The motion
for a jury was overruled aud some evidence
was listened to mainly from City Clerk
Dana, who Is the legal custodian of the
ballot boxes, and R. A. Proctor, j. B.
Spoor, Milton TAYLOR and II. Hoffman,,
Judges of election in the first and second
precincts ofthe First ward in which Mr..
Baird alleges that he got the worst of it.
The testimony given strongly suggested
that the ballot boxes as they appeared in
court we're not in precisely the same
condition as they were when they
originally left the hands of the Judges of
election.
Judge anDevanter appeared for Mr..
Baird and Mr.. Stoll for Mr.. Ross.
The ballot box of the first precinct was
first opened and the contents examined
by r, A. Doctor one Of the judges in
that precinct at the late election. Among
the contents we're found two ballots.
neither OF which have the initials of any
of the judges and only one of which have
the official stamp. Neither of these Mr..
Proctor testified, had been counted. There
was one spoiled ballot. which having been
incorrectly filled by a voter, had been re-
turned to the judges and replaced by a
new ballot In addition to these there
were In the box all the legal ballots cast,
which were strung on a string aud then
tied in a package and ten ballots rolled
together, tied with a string and marked
Illegal. These ballots Mr.. Proctor
testified had been regularly cast by voters
but were so disfgured and marked that
the judges could not count them for any
Que.
The legal ballot and the package OF ten
ballots marked Illegal were offered in
evidence on behalf of Baird. Mr. Stoll
objected, because the evidence so far
sdduced had shown neither fraud nor
mistake. They, therefore, could not 20
back of the official returus. Judge Van
Devanter read from the original petition
Of the plaintiff to show nat the claim
had been made that the vote had been
erroneous. Not less than seven votes, it
was alleged. were thus lost IN that pre-
cinct by Baird. The court overruled the
objection and allowed an exception.
Tie ballot box of precinct No. . was
then brought forward and L.. b. Spoor,
one of the judges of election, called to
the staud. The box was opened and the
legal ballot readily found, but Mr.. Spoor
was unable to find the package of spoiled
and illigal ballots. To the best of his re-
collection there had been fourteen to
twenty of these ballots.
You cannot find the ballots which
were marked spoiled and illegal?' asked
Mr.. Stoll.
No, sir" replied the witness. Il
haven't found any package wrapped up
as they were. If it was there l would
have seen it."
They were put in the same as the 9TH
ers, carried to Mr.. Dana's office and de-
livered to him at 1880 or 8 O'Clock on the
evening of Jan. II, 1872"
Yes"
You know they were in the box when
it was delivered to Mr.. Dana?"
yes"