The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1893-09-28
HARPER TRIAL CLOSES.
Continued from First Page.

And when you came to the ward Line
vote did you count them al aI.. oyeff
/ think / did. smeg
not wish for the yes" votes to prevail?
Yes, think ! did:
Now is not Ward One close ward?
It has been within thirty-five or forty.
Now reference has been made by my
brother to an ambulance. Was that
the patrol wagon?
1t was.
That was the only ambulance there.
Yes.
Do You remember when Mr.. Guptill
came in?
| do
Do you remember when he asked you
70 Yes 3slis 9''-s p'sA % Asip you '''A'
Do you remember his testimony yes
terday whe he said you said you had
burned sixty split tickets?
I do not.
Would you deny the accuracy of that
statement?
Why did you not allow some one to
come in according to his suggestion and
help you?
Thought it would do no good. as
had burned some ballots.
hut he says you had only burned
about sixty splits
But I burned others after he went out.
But mean the first time he came in.
/ think there were others burned be-
sides the sixty told him about.
You burned the ballots because you
had right to?
did It on City Clerk Russell's advice.
Why didn't you burn them allp
There wasn't time
But the stove was there already, and
it would have taken but few minutes.
When Mr.. Guptill said what he did
-. l,a n1yNIQ
me.
So to relieve yourself from the per-
plexity you burned more ballots?
I thought the figures would show with
out the ballots | thought that i there
was a mistake the city clerk would find
You thought SO even if you did not
have the ballots?
Yes.
WHY did you say to the policeman in
the patrol wagon that there was mis-
take of hundred
heard it talked about in the Ward
room.
So you knew the fact was pretty wide
Iy knowne
Yes.
County Attorney True then presented
the Ward book to Harper, and asked It
his signature to it was made in the ward
room or in the City Auditors Office. 1t
was developed that the ink was different
from that used in the ward room.
If you knew there was an error why
did you not have it corrected in the Au-
ditor's Officer
did.
That was the mistake, but you had
heard there was mistake of hundred.
Why did you change only three?
I could find no mistake OF hundred.
In changing this record you had in
mind only a change OF three?
That is ALL
Did you know anything about the
number of ballots given out in the ward
room, from Asa Russell or otherwise?
You remember seeing the newspaper
men in the City Clerks office?
I do.
I did.
What did you refer to?
The error of one hundred. 30 ~ $
You thought that would be correct
ed?
/ thought the City Clerk would do it.
Here closed the testimony, and the
arguments were next In order, MI. CllH-
Argument for the Defence
being next in order. A recess interviewed
and then Mr.. Clifford began his address:
AS I stated to you in my opening the
it is necessary to show that the act was
done. and second that that act was the
result of a fraudulent intent. Now if
YOU believe that Mr. Harper, who has
gone onto the stand and given you the
fullest and most minute account OF
what he did, with criminal intent, you
must infer it from the circumstances
of this case.
Now it is well known axiom that men
do not do things without motives. Now
what motive was there here? 1t could
not have been to aid the Democratic
party, since that party had already car
ried the ward What object could Mr..
Harper have had to raise the votes OF
Common Councilmen and Warden in
wards where they were already elected
without reference to the remainer Of the
ticket?
Now the counsel upon the other side
will contend that there was an object in
raising the vote of mayor, because the
vote for mayor will count all over the
city. The counsel for the government
may insist that he raised the vote of the
lower candidates in order to make the
return symmetrical. But that falls to
the ground. There is not a line of proof
to show that Darius II. Ingraham did
not receive TAG votes The counsel for
the defence may have some ingenious
theory to show that Darius II. Ingraham
did not receive 746 votes but there is
not syllable of proof to show this .
They have only shown there was an
error of SO evotes in the return for mayor,
and 81 on ward lines. 1t is also neces-
ssry to show that James P. Baxter re
ceived 4eO votes, and this has not been
done. Then how do you not know that
the mistake was made in the vote of
Baxter?
Now because there were 50 votes more
on the total vote than there were voters
marked on the check list, the government
assumes that those So votes were given
to Darius H Ingraham But the govern
1nent has left this case in such way
that you are as much at liberty to as
sumo that this mistake was as much in
favor of Baxter as Ingraham.
The government comes in here with
banners flying with high sounding terms,
hat & fraudulently and "feloniously"
certain things have been done by Mr..
Harper. and then ends ingloriously by