The Press., 1893-03-02
p;nnev va. Keeney,

fore, the report as given by the Hartford Times (democratic). This report, it is fair to presume, is tinged with partiality for the contestant, as those of the repub- lican papers may also be assumed to be for the defendant:
 Town Clerk Black, of Stafford, pro- duced memoranda of the results of the counting in Stafford on election night. Some of the memoranda was in the writ ing of Mir. E. H. Pinney; ex-Senator Pin ney's son.
 John Wightman, of Stafford, testified as to the accuracy of the memoranda, as compared with memoranda of his own. It corresponded with the memoranda Of MT. Black.
 A ballot cast for ..G. E. Keeney' was not counted for George B. Keeney, and counsel for MT. Keeney attempted to prove this by the memoranda above de- scribed. The ballot was not covered in the official return of the counters, and there was long controversy between counsel as to whether the memoranda was admissible as against the official re- turns in the ballot box or the copy sent to the secretary of state.
 Clinton Bennett, of Mansfield, next testified regarding disputed votes in that town in which he was 8 counter last No vember. One straight democratic ticket had an electors name erased with blue lead pencil. MT. Pinneys name was on the ticket, and it was counted for him. On cross-examination he said he was not one of the counters on the state ticket, but he saw the ballot when he was open ing the envelopes. The ballot was not disputed. He did not remember seeing any republican ballots scratched, although l the returns show that electors were scratched on four republican tickets. He te9ssld not swear positively that the ballot in nuests1a was counted.
 Thomas M. Ross; of Iapssislds re- publican counter, who counted the general ] tickets, testified to seeing two or three 1 democratic ballots with blue pencil eras- lures. They bore Mir. Pinney's name and ! were counted. On cross s-examinati0n, he admitted that at the time he did not re- gard them as marked for identification. Had he regarded them as otherwise he would not have signed as counter. Could not remember how the names were erased from four republican tickets.
 Frank W. Willard testified further re- garding the blue pencil ensures, and that no objection was made to counting the ballots. He would not swear that the
  rather than presidential electors. Some republican presidential electors were erased with black lead pencil marks.
 Fred M. Barrows, of Willimantic, son of ex-Principal Barrows of the Brown school of Hartford, was asked regarding conversation with Osrow Hanks, a dem- ocratic counter in Mansfield, about three weeks after election, about politics. Counsel for MT. Pinney objected. Judge Eggleston, for MT. Keeney, said that Mir. Hanks had been summoned three times to come to Hartford and had not respond ed. Counsel for MT. Pinney laughingly added that he had also sent him two dlo- tices to appear. Judge Eggleston said it was proposed to prove what Hanks had said about the blue pencil erasures; he had claimed to be sick ever since the hear ing opened.
 Mir. Hyde suggested -<'H you are going | into all the conversation in Mansfield about politics since last November it will take some time. We offered some time ago to take the deposition of MT. Hanks" 1" After consultation the committee con- I cluded not to admit the evidence of MT. Barrows.
 1 Judge Eggleston said they had proposed to prove by Barrows that Hanks said that I he marked the ballots. The only alterna- tive is to open the box. I MT. Gross, for Mir. Pinney, added sharp ly that there was no evidence that Hanks ever marked single ballot.
 An extended discussion occurred be- tween counsel, during which MT. Gross suggested that the evidence as to the marking of the ballots was wholly indefi- nite witnesses testified that ballots were marked on different names, and possibly hx1f lead very commonly used.
 Chairman Pierce said that the majority of the committee were firm in their con- viction that the evidence of MT. Barrows was made inadmissible.
 William Batchelder, of Stafford, called for Senator Keeney, testified regarding the memoranda or tally sheet of the court in the first district of Stafford on election night. The ballot for ''G. E. Keeney' was not counted MT. Keeney. On cross examination, he said that the memoran- dunn had been kept since election in 8 place in the town clerks office where per sons could reach it if they had any pur- pose in doing so.
 Samuel Baldwin admitted that he has lived in Stafford less than six months, and had voted for MT. Pinney, under the belief that he had located in town early l OhOdSh' 6Ao CO HID pOLOy bIAOLS PCOplC in Stafford in answering the question of how he voted, he said:
 | "Whin they asked me if l voted for Pinney, said yis, and when they asked if voted for Keeney, said yis. Twas not under oath. I was not obliged to tell me saycret ballot."
 Osrow Hanks, the missing Mansfield witness, did not appear, and a capias was issued by the committee.
 Much has been expected of evidence concerning the vote of the town of Mans field, because of statements made by Mr.
 Hanks, evidence Of which it was hoped would induce the committee to open the ballot box of that town, which is in their possession. The committee, however, by party vote excluded evidence of what Mir. Hanks had said, and when MT. H. himself, after repeated summonings, was finally got to appear before the committee on Tuesday evening, he testified that he SMITH & MURRAY.