Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1891-02-26
SAVED BY pARTISANSHIP,

Disagreement = They Stand Out
Against Testimony and the Courts
Charge.
The case of the State VS. Franklin B.
Cotton indicted for refusing to accept
the ballot of a legal voter, was resumed
at yesterday afternoon weeks court
and Benjamin Nields, made the opening
argument to the jury for the defence. He
commended that he would show that the
defendant had not knowingly refused
10 accept the ballot of legal voter and
that he had only acted in accordance
with his instructions and his oath. He
claimed that he would show that the
naturalization paper on which Louis De
Stephano offered to vote was not
legal and was one of a lot that had been
pointed for the United States court, and
condemned on account of an error.
William Voshell testified that he was
one of the Judges in the Twelfth dis
trict on November 4th, 1890, and saw
De Stephano when he came to the
window to vote. Mr.. Carpenter and
Mr.. Cotton had declined to accept the
votes of Mclaughlin and Fidance, each
of whom had naturalization paper
similar to that presented by De Stephano,
Mr.. Cotton sent messenger to Judge
Wales, to know about the legality of
the papers of the first two, and as he
did not hear from him, refused to accept
the vote of the third. Frank d. Car
penter agreed with Mr.. Cotton, when
Mclaughlin and Fidance attempted to
vote, to hold their cases in allegiance
until Judge Wales could be heard from.
When De Stephano attempted to vote,
Joseph l.. Carpenter, Jr., demanded that
his ballot should be received, and after
talking with Mr.. Cotton went away.
When he returned he said he had seen
Judge Wales, and the papers were all
right. Mr., Cotton asked him il he had
written document to that effect, when
he replied that he had not and inquired
if his word was not sufficient. Mr..
Cotton said it was in everything except
politics. When Mr.. Cotton sent the
messenger to Judge Wales in the morn
ing and he returned without an answer
he seemed very much annoyed.
At this time Chief Justice ComegyS
called on Clerk of the United States
court S. redmond Smith, to explain
about the naturalization papers used in
the court, and he stated that they had
three kinds, one of which was for thost
who were minors when they came tC
this country, another for foreigners who
had served in the army, and the thire
for those who had been here for years
Some time ago he ordered some of tht
latter to be printed, and when they
came he discovered an error, which
caused them to be condemned. Jus
before the election, Marshal MahafTl
and some other gentlemen, asked hin
to furnish each election inspector wht
wished one, with copy of the con
demned papers, so that he could com
pare any papers that might be presented
with it and he did So
After Mr. Smith concluded his state
ment, the cross-eXamination OF MI
Voshell was commenced by Mr.. Biggs
but nothing material was brought out
When the examination was concluded
the jury We're discharged until 10 oelocl
Thursday morning.
All the jurors except those in the cas-
on trial were discharged from an.
further attendance, showing that this
the last case to be tried.
A Judgment of $9S,000 in favor of tn
plaintiffs has been obtained by Charlie
j. Lore in the case of the Oliver lrol
and Steel Company VS.. Charles j. Shult7
Court adjourned until 10 o'cloc
Thursday morning.
The Cotton case was again taken II
at Thursdays session of court, an
clerk of the United States court,
Redmond Smith, was recalled, an
pointed out the error in natliralizatio
paper, which caused a number Of thes
papers to be condemned.
Edmund Mitchell, Jr., was called an
upon being shown the naturalizatio
paper said that il was used by Mr.. Co
ton on election day. He had it as
guide, and the witness was positive thu
the paper shown him was the one use
that day. He saw Mr.. Cotton compal
several papers with this.
James Laughlin the witness who WI
sick last week took the stand, and state
that on election day, November 4, 1879
he was United States deputy marsh
at the polls in the Twelfth Distric
Fifth ward, of this city He has been
naturalized citizen for over twel'
years, and when he went to vote at Il
last election, he was challenged
Frank D. Carpenter, on his naturall2
ition papers. He showed the papers
Mr.. Cotton, and he said he would sci
10 the United States court, and sec
they were all right. Mr.. Carpenter :
fused to permit his vote to be rcceiy,
and Mr.. Cotton said he would hold Il
matter in allegiance. Several times dl
ing the afternoon he made inquiry It's
whether he could deposit his ballot II
did not get to vote at all. 1t was |
intention to vote the Republican tick
William II. Billany, who acted At t
Twelfth district polls as United Stat
supervisor, testified that from the pc
tion which he occupied, he could plain
hear all that was said at the windo
When Fidance presented his pap,
they We're examined, and as there Is
Fome doubt about their legality, up
their being compared with tic co
which Mr.. Cotton had, the vote was /
received. The same was the case "
McLaughlin's papers, and he was ch
banged by some one in the room, but
Witness did not know by whom VII
DE Stophano came TO tine window in
afternoon his papers We're Identical "
those that had preceded him, and
Cotton declined 10 receive his ball
None of these votes were positively
fused, but were held under adyisemG
and a messenger was sent by Coll
with Fidance and Mclaughlin's pap
10 Judge Wales. He did not return, d
the witness heard Mr. Cotton inqu
several times if he had returned, d
seemed very much irritated upon lea
ing that he had not.
Edmund Mitchell, Jr,, upon being
called, stated that he was al the polls
day as a challenger, He challeu
Eidanre1s vote an his u.tnore ond