Evening journal., 1891-02-19
LAST EDITIOlN
WITNESSES FOR CJLTON.
THEY TESTIFY THAT ne MEANT
NO HARM.

hoiH ~ Ano5ahte pHtlt inspector
MColton should 6 ct Advice From the
Federal Court-Ifdmund Mitchell. Jr.,
Held the Papers
When court resumed after recess yes
terday sftern oon the trial of Franklin B.
Colten for refusing to accept the vote of
Louis DeStepanis, was proceeded with
Benjamin Nields opened the case for
the defence. he proposed to show that
the defendant did not knowingly and
wilfully refuse the vote of Louis De-
Stepanis. His client was acting as pub
lie officer la an official capacity and
unless it could be proved that he had
formed a judgment against the person
knowing this to be wrong, he could
not be convicted Counsel then
read the oath administered to inspectors
of elections, and proposed TO show that
there were reasons before his clients
mind why he be ieved that DeStepanis was
was not entitled to exercise the franc hise
William p Voshell, who, with Frank
~ Carpenter, was a Judge at the
Twelfth election district polls on election
day, testified that when DeStepanis pre-
sented his papers and offered to vote that
day, Mr. Cotton said that he could not
accept his vote until he had advice on
the legality of certain similar papers pre-.
sented by James McLauglin aud Nicholas
Fidance on the same day, and held in
abeyance then These votes were held
in allegiance because the naturalization
papers which they presented were
different in form from a blank furnished
to the inspectors and judges.
Mr. Nields offered this blank in evi
dence, but the attorney general OBJ
iected and the chief justice declared it
was not evidence of anything.
The Chief Justice" Where did this
paper come from?V
Witness-'I saw it come from Mr.
Colton's pocket.
The witness said that he had received
all the tax receipts presented at the win
dow that day, but he had no knowledge
of having received either the tax receipt
OF ballot from DeStepanis Cotton told
him th0t he heli the papers ia abeyance
until he had received advice from the
United States Court, whittier he had
sent messenger. After DeStepaniss
vote was refused he did not return to the
window or attempt to vote that dav
The testimony of William P. Voshell
was then continued. When eph L.
Carpenter came back he said that he had
Stbn uQEb WaibSt WHO bNb
papers to be genuine. Mr. Colten asked
for written statement to that effect
which Mr. Carpenter did not have. Mr..
Cotton said he was willing TO take Mr.
Carpenters words on anything but in
politics This occurred while the mes
senger sent by Mr.. Cotton to the Federal
Court was still absent. Tbe defendant
did not refuse to accept the vote of De-
ShoPauis. but merely held it in abeyanca
until he had received. such information
as would satisfy him of the validity or
invalidity OF the naturalization papers in
question.
The court here asked United States
Commissioner Smith how many kinds of
naturalization blanks were used by the
Federal Court Mr. Smith explained that
there were three. One for honorably
discharged United States soldiers, one
for minors who came to this country
under age and a third for ordinary
foreigners about to be natnralized 4
number of blanks used for minors,
printed for them had a misspelled word.
and could not be legally used. These
were distributed to the election inspec
tors to enable them to mark the differ
ence between the first and last papers,
which are frequently confounded These
from the others and it was one of these
minors blanks which Cotton had in his
possession
The cFoss-examination of William P
Voshell was then begun by the attorney
general. There were four or FIVE votes
held In allegiance during this day. An
argument arose on this question as to
whether the witness had said that four
or five votes exclusive of McLsughlins, s,
Fidsnce's and DeStepanis's, were held in
allegiance. The witness denied this
stoutly, and the attorney. general as
stoutly maintained it. The court decided
that the witness was right. The witness
did not know who the messenger was
who was sent by Mr.. Cotton to the United
States Court, nor could he tell whether
he ever came back or not
At this point the jury was discharged
until 10 o'clock this morning
A few minutes after 10 o'clock this
morning the judges took their places on
the bench. and proceeded to hear testi-
mony in the case of the state VS. Cotton.
s. Redmond Smith, clerk of the United
States Court, was called for the defence
and, in answer to Mr. Nialds, said the
paper produced and used by Mr., Cotton
as a criterion on election day, was the
form of q naturalization paper used
for a minor. 1t was condemned
because of a misspelled word, and
furnished to the inspectors of elections al
the instance of Marshal Mahaffy. He haC
no authority for furnishing these forms
and did it only to accommodate the ap
plicants and to assist as q guide for the
inspectors in distinguishing between tn,
first and 6nal papers furnished to for
eigneas There was a slight difference
between the verbal construction in this
and the ordinary naturalization FORMS
the court then was asked to admit the
form in evidence. The attorney genera
objected on the ground that it had MOI
been proved that this was the particular
paper used by Captain Cotton on election
day.
Captain Mitchell testified that this wa
the paper which Cotton had used. a
saw him use 1t and compare ether papers
with it during that day. Mr.. ColtoI
gave this paper to witness to bring it {,
the United States Court, together will
the papers Of James Mclaughlin, t.
ascertain the latter's validity. The paper
was then admitted as evidence
James Mclaughlin. whose condition
was the cause of double postponement
of the Cotton trial, was the next witness
He testified that he lived at No lit
West Eighth street, in the Twelfth
election district. He offered to vote thai
day, but Frank d. Carpenter challenged
his vote on the ground that the natural
ization papers which he produced were
not final Mr. Cotton took possession O.
Il. \ - l. ~.