New-York tribune., 1891-12-18
uo1TSE ELECTION CONTESTS
THE TITLES TO SIX SEATS IN DISPUTE.
.r7S,oy IN FAVOR OF TWO REPUBLICANS PROB
ABLE-THE ALABAMA AND SOUTH
CAROLINA CASES
rsY IELEGkAPH TO THE TRIBUNE :

fBY TELEGRAPH THE TkBUNE.1
washington Dec. IT.--Much Interest centres In the
.,,,os,tion OF tho House Committee on Elections
SAeb IS TO investigate and report as TO the titles
a. siY seats which in dispute, three OF which
v nav occupied by Democrats aud three by Re
s'hucans The number OF contests Is only one
.A,yd as great the numLer in the last Congress.
The disposition Of those contests by the Committee
- Elections and by the House was very different
am what people suppose who have derived their
,.ormation from Democratic newspapers and cam
nairn speeches, In which the truth has been per.
,.rted and the facts misreprcsented. Any intelligent
.pd faIrminded person who will carefully examine
,s excellent Digest Of Contested Election Cases" Of
,he last Congress prepared by Chester H. Rowell
clark OF the committee-a work which is vast
,nprovement any OF ITS predecessors since the
organiration of the Ist Congrcss-wl discover that
hose cases were investigated with extreme thorough
ness and decided with unusual d"gree Of freedom
from partisan bias. far Mt least as the majority
Of the committee concerned.
In all the cases the titles of sitting members who
were Democrats attacked all the contestants.
save one. were Republicans six cases were decided
IN favor Of Democratic contestees, nine Democratic
ecutestees unseated Republican contestants
and one contestant who was independent candidate
were seated; Republican contestant who was de
eared elected. had been assassnated while engaged
IN taking testimony in support of his contest in two
eating OF the Democratic contestees and the seating
a, the Republican contestants, the House failed to
take action, and ease was not disposed of by the
committee. This brief statement Of the nature Of the
decIsionS is alone sufficient to demoSh the partisan
assertions 10 the effect that the last Committee on
Elections controlled by partisan bias. and that
the House decided the in favor of the Repub-
ucan contestants Unfortunately and regardless Of
The law and the facts In each case.
nending election contests hall he decided
tsirly and justly by the Committee on Elections
10 be appointed, and by the present House of Repre-
s.ntstives were the I'm the List Congress
by the last Committee on Elections and the last House
Of Representatives. there will be slight ground for
plant Oh the part of anybody for in that the
proportion If decisions in favor of Republicans will be
even greater in this Congress than in the last
In three Cd the pending the contestants Re
pubncans-one from New York, one from Alabama AID
one from South Carolina. review OF the New York
case was published in these dispatches several days
AGO Both Of the Southern cases are between the
same who contested the from the same
districts In the last Congress- by which both Of the
Democratic contestees unseated and both of the
Republican contestants seated-the case of McDuhe
against Trpn OF the IVth Alabama DISTRICT, and that
Of Miller against Elliott of the With South Carolina
District. In the former the issues the same
As in the last Congress- but the manufs major
y" Of the sitting member Is considerably smaller; in
the latter the issues are new.
Owing the universal belief on tue part of the
coloed that their will not be counted
east 1t has been the custom for several years for the
Republican clubs in each precinct TO organize for the
purpose OF making it possible to prove the vote
contest Ticket distributors and clerks appointed
and on the day of election they take their places at
the nearest point to the polls that is allowed
to 90 except while voting The colored voters form in
body behind these men and go to the voting window
one at q time. The voter takes ticket and shows il
20 the clerk, who reads 1t and puts down the voters
B.me The voter holding the ticket out from bis body
in hand, that he be not TO have changed
IT, then goes to the window, votes and returns TO the
clerk and tells him how he has voted II his ticket has
been in sight all the time his name is checked OIL the
list and another voter votes in the way. When
the counted IT is generally found that from two
thirds to nine tenths of the voters who have thus taken
such careful precautions TO be known voting the
Republican ticket are returned having voted the
Democratic ticket.
In the last Congress, taking the vote Of the whole
district the returns showed that If every white voter
had voted and voted for Turpn, half Of the colored
voters must have failed 10 vote and twothrds OF the
remainder have voted for Turpin, 10 produce the r.
suit certified by the Democratic election officers
the present the dsproportion is not so great
In the whole district, but is fully great in many
Of disputed precincts The judges OF election are
usually all Democrats, or IL publican is appointed,
he is the most ignorant negro who can be found In
the precinct. Where there is a Republican United
States Supervisor, he is kept out Of the room If prac
tcable, under a misconstuction of the law, and il
not the baobox Is removed from his presence for an
hour at dinner time. AT the count Of the votes tira
Judges and clerks sit that is impossible for the
supervisor TO at the same time that the tickets
ara read correctly and the tally fairly and honestly
kept. The evidence Of the contestants consists
chiefly of the testimony of the Republican ticket
distributors and clerks, recitng the above facts and
presenting the lists kept by them. 1t would be
t Of the question to call the voters themselves in
the time allowed for taking testimony. The contestee
has taken no testimony in regard to some precincts,
but In most OF them he has called part of the on-
GERS OF election to testify that they saw no fraud and
witnesses 10 show that the typical plan OF voting above
described was not in all respects carried out, so that
Of the links In the chain OF circunstanuaI evil
dence wanting.
The majority of the committee in the last Congress
applied the testimony in regard to Individual pre-
cincts in substantially the following manner: Where
there was no testimony for the contestee, or the
testimony was not such rs to amount to q denial
Of the fraud, being the testimony Of an hlftera'e
Inspector, who could not have known whether the
votes were correctly counted not, or of one OF
the other inspectors, when the circumstances were
such that the fraud conld have been committed by
the third without knowledge OF the other two. or
where the election inspectors were impeachcd either
by testimony circumstances. and where the testi-
mony for contestant clear and definite, even
though all the details of the abovedescsbed typical
were not carried out, the returns were rejected
and the vote counted according to the proof
Mr. Rowe the clerk Of the Committee on Elections,
who prepared the testimony in these cas.s for the
printer and is therefore thoroughly familiar with IT,
has prepared a careful analysis OF th,m, which The
Tribune correspondent has been permitted to use
In this article Inasmuch as the case OF McDuhe
against Turpin is substantially like the same case In the
last Congressexcept that the returned majority for the
eontestee is smaller-it may reasonably be expected
that tho Democratic majority OF the Elections Com
mittee and of the House viii decide did the Demo-
cratic minority in the last Congress, In favor OF
Turpin. The contest is typical Southern one IL
comes from the notorous-Ivth District of
Alabama, which has furnished contested election