Morning journal and courier., 1892-05-26
THOSE MARKED BALLOTS.

l Testimony Introduced in , the Phelan.Walsh QUO WarrantO-l Suit-The Bridgeport RallOt BOx Opened-The Marks Were Made in Printing - Experts Testify - Many Ballot Boxes opened - Governor Bulkeley Present.
 The Phelan-Walsh quo warranto suit had another inning in the superior court yesterday. Judge Hall was on the bench and Attorneys Harrison and Stoddard for the plaintiff and Case and Cole for the de- fense were all on hand when the court opened promptly at 10 o'clock. Among the interested spectatorz at yesterdays l hearing were noticed Governor Bolkeley 1 and John J. Phelan, the relator in the case, and ex-State Attorney Hammersley of Hartford. The first witness introduced was William L. Loomis, town clerk of Sufield, who tes- tifed that on May 5, 1891, the ballot box in his town was opened, and tour democrats and two republicans participat- | ed in a recount of the ballots. The recount l revealed that PAT democratic state ballots 1 had been counted which bore the name of | no candidate for judge of probate, written, printed or pasted. There were four dem ocratic ballots which had the name of the democratic candidate for judge of probate l written in the blank. An objection was made to the admission of these ballots as evidence by ex-Judge Harrison on the ground that there was no one there to iden- tify the ballots. Judge Hall admitted the ballots to show the effect.
 The witness also testified that the pro- hibition and industrial reform tickets which were cast at the last election bore no name of any candidate for judge of probate, but that all these ballots were counted
 The ballots were identified and the testi- mony of MT. Loomis corroborated by John L. Wilson, one of the counters.
 The next witness, Henry Abbey, re- publican counter in the town of Enfield. testified that when the count was made in his town two republican ballots were re- jected because one corner was turned over. l He stated that the moderator had rejected the ballots because he claimed they were folded
 The ballot box from the town of Stat ford was then opened by orders from Judge Hall for the purpose of introducing the eleven prohibition ballots from that town which were rejected because of the word ''for" A locksmith was secured and the ballot box of the town of Thomp son opened for the purpose of obtaining corroborative evidence. Severol days agt one of the witnesses in the case testified that all the democratic state ballots bor' the name of no candidate for judge of pro bate. There were 182 such ballots, all O which were cast and counted. The clain of the defense is that these ballots wer informal and should not have bee, counted.
 q. Town Clerk Russell of Haddam testified that the ballots in his town had beel destroyed, but he remembered that abou @ dozen democratic tickets which bore tn = name of no candidate for judge of probat had been cast and counted.
 THOSE BRIDGEPORT BALLOTS. 'p At this stage of the hearing the defens
 called for the ballot box from the Eft
 district of Bridgeport. This is the bo
 which contained the 126 so-called marke
 or specked ballots which were rejected
 The box was at once opened and the pacl
 age of ballots laid in as evidence.
 Frederick O.. Mullins, a counter, closet
 examined each one of the alleged marke
 ballots and identified them as those whic
 had been re jected. The attorneys exam
 ined the ballots under magnifying glasse
 Ex-Judge Stoddard almost immediate
 explained: "Why, that is palpably g 'n identifying mark. There is no doubt
 it."
 The marks for which they were throw
 out are very small specks on the pap . which might easily have been made by
 fective type or a defect in the paper 4
 the right of the in the word "gove
 nor" appears on the greater portion of tl a tickets a mark which looks under magn sa- flying glass like diminutive cross. tn the other tickets there is speck at u ng bottom of the T in the word 'lieute a's ant" Mayor Marig"ld testified that
 had examined the ballots in the Fifth di
 trict and to his mind there was no dou hh he but that the marks were caused by t n'' l press.
 nss ,ga, next witness. He testified that he W cer present at the time of the count at en, election in the Fifth ward He was call nEs ng, over to the table by one of the counter der who said that there was some trouble ov
 certain ballots which the democrats clail
 ed were marked. He went over and i
 spected the ballots and found on the
 certain specks which he had noticed on t
 ballots the night before. He expressed
 opinion at that time that the marks we
 made by flaw in the stereotyping or bJ
 piece of the roller which had become d
 tached and made the marks.
 Judge Stoddard objected to any su
 testimony on the ground that no matt
 what his opinion might be the moderat
 had passed upon the ballots and his dec
 ion was formal and conclusive. The (
 jection was promptly and sharply ov ruled by Judge Hall.
 Mayor Marigold also produced 700 b
 bots which had been left over from {
 election and of these nearly one half e
 tained marks or specks. William E. D
 brow, republican committeeman of 1 T. Fifteenth ward of Bridgeport, testif that at the recent election question ar,
 about marked ballots by gentleman W
 was in the room where the count was D.
 gressing. q went into the room,"
 said, "where the count was being made d saw there lot of ballots which they very tended to throw out. The pack, .'s a of ballots was so large that it mortified I eys I found there 126 ballots which at t and time had been practically thrown out I run tn the ground that they were mark
 MT. Mullins, one of the counters, 8 the that the ballots were marked TOT asked l. aa MF Mullins 4 very vel yha Pi,nt Points ns particularly. He replied that it was ausf d cause he had seen someone marking lot up against tree. I examined in this about twenty or thirty of the so-cal fed marked ballots and have always c n rail, io demned myself for not examining all a and 126. The marks on the ballots consis and of small cross between the letters V siled ae E in the word governor. I went to ,ck Standard office and took George B. WI says ney, practical printer, with me, as I 1
 that the marks were made by the mach 'rass cry in printing. After MT. Whit Iys1 haS had examined the ballots he assured ttinp and the others present that he would stake ath personal and practical reputation on the st rihle ment that the marks on the ballots were mad led the type. MT. WMtney examined perhaps te oths twenty oi tnese DaLots. Another practlcai pr
 CT, John N Near, democ at, examined the
 lots and emphatically stated that the ms nen anpeaae be coer or % Mnn 'adu l have 1he ballots counted, but he pointedly Col fused to do so, rem marking that he would st of count those ballots if all the practical prin pre- in Bridgeport swore that they were made by t 'ugs, or machinery" (Here the witness idenIife His package Of ballots which he said were ident To- with those rejected at the recent election as osite ing marked baliots)
 III as On cross examinatit n Mir. Disbrow said tha ach, believed one of the republican counters at ases, | election had expressed an opinion that the tien, lots were marked and not by any type
 chinery. This republican counter was alsI to printer, MT. Buckingham. The witness con ). ued: "On the ballots which examined fo three marks One of these marks was betw
 the letters E and V in the word governor, an, | CT looked like pencil mark under the letter ! in the word republican, and another between
 letters B and N in the word lieutenant. and ! not remember that my attention was called
 any mark under the letter.T in he word lieu 'ent | ant. Practically the same marks appear bot of the ballots and were undoubtedV caased hv Q and xpor EoI,l f.