New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-12-15
MKANE IN CONTEMPT.
FULLPENALTY VISITED ONHIM
JUDGE NEWTON AND THREE ELECTION
INSPECTORS EQUALLY GUILTY.
JUDGE BARNARD SENTENCES ALL FIVE TO
THIRTY DAYS IMPRISONMENT AND TO
PAY A FINE OF s25o-AN APPEAL
WIFI. TAKEN
WILL BE TAKEN.

THIRTY DAYS IMPRlSONMENI AMI ~
PAY FINE OF s25o-AN APPEAL
WILL BE TAKEN.
| The decision OF Judge Barnard. adjudging John
| Y McKane. Supervisor and Chief Of Police Of
| the town of Gravesend; Richard V. 3. Newton,
| Justice Of the Peace, and Election Inspectors
johnson, Crandall and Cropsey, Of the same
| town, guilty OF contempt Of court In their ac-
| tlons on Election Day. was filed yesterday IN
| the Supreme Court, in Brooklyn. The full PEN
| atty OF the law was imposed on them, and they
| were each sentenced to thirty days imprison-
| ment In the county Jail and to pay fine OF
| $3.50 This result of the legal proceedings, which
| took place last week. was hailed with delight
by all lovers Of law and order, all good citi-
zens and the public generally In Brooklyn
Public sentiment was stirred to such degree
by the outrages and frauds on Election Day,
and by the great mass-meetng held few days
thereafter, that 1t Is regarded an excellent
sign that the chief offender. John Y. McKane
has been brought to justice, and that he will
be placed behind prison bars for his hagrant
disregard OF the courts.
He has found, in spite Of his bold asser-
ton. when surrounded by his mnons in Graves
end on Election Day, that "Injunctions don't
go here" that they do "go" there as well as
elsewhere, and that Gravesend and Coney
Island. despite his autocratic rule, are part
of the Second Department of the Supreme Court
of the State Of New-York. Although every pos
sible legal device will be resorted to in order
to prevent the execution of the sentence 1t
cannot be doubted that the clear-cut decision
of Judge Barnard will be sustained by the
higher courts. and that McKane and his as
sociates will have to serve their terms in Ray
mond Street Jail
TESTIMONY AGAINST M'KANE.
The proceedings for contempt of the injunction
which Judge Barnard issued the day before the
election were begun against the five defendants
found guilty. and Police Sergeant Murphy and
Policeman No. II. The wo last. named proved
that they were not present when the service Of
the papers was disregarded. and the proceedings
against them were dismissed A great mass Of
affidavits was presented at the hearing before
Judge Barnard. The principal afilants for the
prosecution were Colonel y. 5. Bacon, T.. VI.
Grout w J. Gaynor T.. $. Doubleday. Herbert s
Worthley. Peter Rosenback, the Rev Robert j.
Kent and Louis Stoiber, and they deposed to sub
stantia!ly the same statements Of fact.
As soon as the commitment under the decision
is signed by Judge Barnard and entered as an
order Of the court II becomes the duty OF the
Sheriff to arrest the defendants and send them
% serve their terms in Jail and to collect the
amount II the fines. But Counsel for Mckane
and the others have prepared papers asking for
a stay OF proceedings pending an appeal. If the
stay is secured the defendants Will remain
under $1,000 bail. In which they have been held
since their arrest for contempt. until the case Is
decided by the General Term. The matter can
come before the General Term IN February. AS
Judge Barnard retires from the bench. his place
in General Term will be filed by Judge Cullen,
I.T oil.
ings In Grayesend before him he will probably
not hear the appeal. ani it will be decided by
Judges Pratt and Dykman. II the General Term
Of IN. supreme Court aiirms Judge Barnards
opinion the case will then be carried To- the Court
of Appeals. 50 that II may bc year or more be-
fore the defendants suffer the penalty or the law.
They will be held In the county jail as poor debt
are. but will have the freedom Of the building
and will dine with the warden
The following Is the text of Judge Barnards
decision:
Gravescnd. town in Kings COUNTY had in iS95
Sis Inhabitants a. sh.~n oy o tne f H'' rsisre res oi
vote OF about l.ccl This registry number agrees
before the census was taken In the fall OF that
year the vote Of the town was returned at over
SGN In the fall OF 1893 the registry Of voters
To- G2l6 The plaintiff. who was candidate for an
important office. to be voted for In the November
election Of 1899 applied TO the inspectors Of election
Tor copies of the lists in each OF the six districts
Of the town. which All voted In one building The
10 this court for It's aid in compelling the production
OF the lists so that the plaintiff could copy them
The Court Instructed the inspectors as to the right
Of the plaintiff to copies Of the lists but that
his right no greater than the right OF other
citizens. .
acting for the plaintiff In sufficient numbers 70 copy
the lists with due speed II the lists were prolucel
the instruction Of the Court was used by the IN
spectors TO battle the plaintiff Persons WHO Were
apparently employed In copying the lists refused TO
give them up 10 permit copies 10 be made stimuli
taneousy with these pretended copyists s,n for Is
The lists were posted The INSPECTORS could not
osf s i9uIi h lists ncded the entire body OF the in
spectors Of election. The defendants nave made an
Issue as to the conduct of the plantn q copylsts.
The issue Is of no mp0IIlhCg u'Iel u'r , w. y. d LA
presented To the plaintlf lie dd NOT, ne So1iI
them in a civil and becoming manner. The de,
PENDANTS say that the request was mace Tndeiy ana
E SSr6 Ge lists nos
given. whether the request was made rudely or
politely The plaintiffs case. thus made shows that
a registry OF the voters OF the town made which
Justified the inference of fraud: which did more II
proved it, The law providing for registry DESIGNED
a minority representative in the Board OF lnspec-
tors 1t called for publicity Of the lists.
APPEAL TO THE COURT.
By reason of the unfaithfulness OF the whole
Board of Registry the security to the candidate
entirely failed. Neither the names of this fraudu-
lent registry nor the places of residence OF the
voters could be obtained and election boards mace
up OF these inspectors would be no protection 10
the minority candidate. Under these circumstances
the plalntfs applied to this for its aid. The
marty watchers on the part OF the Republican party
became the object of suspicion, although appointed
by the regular authority In such cases Inc
plaintiffs made application for other watcheIhs, @ thc
plaintiff was to have faithful watchers az the polls
Violence had been used 10 drive away the copylStS
and Violence was anticipated 10 drive away me
watchers. Lpon proof of the facts above detailed
an Injunction was granted restfalnliS me u1,i.,ml,
ants from interfering with hese watchers so cl'thrd
with the power Of appointment from the LepuD-
lican organization. No attempt was made 10 iAteI-
fere win the watchers previously appointed, al
though IL is plain. under the facts as proven by
The affidayits that they were not designed 10
watch in the plaintiffs interest or in the interest
Of the Republican party, which had noHlnatei
hin, for Office The bill OF complaint was proper
for the plaintiff. and all persons similarly situated
A case OF combination and conspiracy was estab,
Iished in respect to the registry and violence mad
been used seemingly to prevent persons from putt
ting themselves where Illegal acts could be seen
e..'3 nd he ILLEGAL result preXentel