The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1893-12-15

Gent numb ers 10 copy the lists with due speed,
The Court i' was used by tho inspectors to baNe
the plaintin Persons who were apparently
employed in copyng the lists refused to give
IS fully SesiabisRcd that no real COPY was
Inspectors could not be found. The combina-
tion to prevent the publicity Of the lists in
Guided tho entire body OF inspectors OF cleo
tion.
The defendants have made an issue as to
the conduct Of the plaintiffs copyists, The
issue Ia OF no importance under the view OF
could not get the lists His agents say they
ner. The defendants say that the request was
made rude!y and without that self-control
which should prevail among pers ms transact
contradlcted. The lists were not given,
whether the requests were made rudely or
The plaintiffs case thus. made. shows that
registry OF the voters OF the town was made
did more, It provided it. The law providing
ior registry designed minority representa-.
pNSt He Of 5I ths ~ NJ S" bs nor
faithiuness Of the whole Board Of Registry.
the security to the candidate entirely tailed.
Neither the names ol this fraudulent registry
nor the places OF residence Of the voters could
he obtained. IN Election Hoard made IN 81
minority candidate.
Under these circumstances the, plaintiff ap..
watShefs ON sn the THrt Of the RenuiaR P psrty
became tho :of SUSPICION, although APP
pointed hy the regular authority in such cases.
watchers. which were appointed. All the
remedy left to the plaintiff was to have faith
ful watchers at tho polls. Violence had been
used to drive away the coryists and violence
was anticipated to drive away the Watchers
| pom proof OF the facts above detail ed an in
junction was granted restraining the defend
ants from interfering with these watchers so
clothed with the nowqr ot app9lntment from
made to interfere with the watchers Previous
y appolnted. although it Is plain. under the
were not designed TO watch in the, plaintiffs
interest or in the interest OF the Republican
party. which had nom mated him for office.
Tho bill Of complaint was proper or the
plaintiff, and all persons similarly situated,
are without any adequate remedy. case OF
combination and conspiracy was established
in respect to the registry, and violence had
been used, seemingly, to prevent persons from
seen and reported and the illegal result pre-
vented, Equity has the power to aid the
Ing a lawful, .purpose in, view. and ono pro-
tected by positive law and needed to give him
a fair vote Under the proof final lnde,
was fraudulent; that the inspectors conspired
to make it fraudulent: and to that end
suppress the publicity Of tho lists; that the
watchers first appointed were appointed for
form only. and that they should have retired
thority u this Court il such an act was needed;
but they could remain without offence to the
It was not within the power OF the defendant
to question the propriety OF the injunction
order. II the Court had jurisdiction OF the
rel Sc agt. Van Buren,. i3G 4 ~ 2-,2. O''' -
Was the order disoheyrd, and by whom
the dtsobsdienco. irst. OF Mr.. Xickane. lie was
Chief Of Police Of tho town: He met the car
Tags in which M Mr. NJ I RGGon ma and others
Bacon alignting from the carriage, stated to
him that he had been expeciing him: Iron
an I'M JUNCTION, Mr.. McKane stated that inIunc-
tions do not go, and ordered Mr.. Bacops ar;
Kane denies this but the treatment OF Mr..
GSs Of p s af ST. m By h
ccnIpanons in the carriage.
The evidence Is so clear and conclusive that
In all the preceding evil which had been DONE
and the police had been so ready to arrest on
one Of the conspirators against the election
laws. II not the chief Of the conspiracy. II Is
would be in accord with his previous, acts. lie
knew OF the Injunction order and dened it, and
must be ajpdged guilty Of q criminal Sontempt.
met Mr. Grout, who was riding In a carriage
toward he polling pleEce with the watchers
that the men were under protection OF an in
junction. but he defed the order. and would
not let the party proceed further. AIollceman
sion, was only a continuation OF his previous
venting the publication OF the lists, notwith-
standing he Ia q Justice OF the Peace OF tho
town The ntfidavits OF the persons who ac-
companied Mr.. Circuit fully sustain his state
ment, and there Ia not any doubt as to the fact
that Mr.. Newton violated the injunction. and
should be adIudged guilty Of criminal con-
tempt.
The three inspectors OF election, johnson,
Crandal. and Cropsey arc guilty OF u criminal
contempt for violation OF the Injunction order.
ono. hosenhnck. appoared at the polling place
and told these inspectors that he had an in
junction order TO serve, He started to produce
copies and was immediately attacked from
every direction" lie threw the papers upon
the table in front OF tho Inspectors. lie was
beaten, thrown down. arrested bya policeman.
and locked up. The inspectors subsequently
signed a warrant for this arrest. The arrest
was. therefore. presumably made at their d.
rection in defiance u the Injunction.
Tho vote OF the town was over $500, which
habitants upon q registry. which called for
over 10000 Inhabitants. What shall the pun
ishment boz An extreme case is made.
combination which Included the Registry
Board. the watchers first appointed. and
tho police. through its Chief is established
false registry there was Illegal refusal to make
IL public Tho copyists had been arrested and
put in cells without the least criminal act on
their part, and the friends and watchers OF
illegally arrested, beaten, and imprisoned hy
the inspectors and police acting with them to
accomplish result injurious in the highest
degree - popular sovereignty which rests
upon fair vote, fair count OF the vote. and
rigid respect to the count thus given.
The extreme punishment provided by the
law must be imposed for such an offence thus
brutally carried out. The accused are fined
each $3.50 and Imprisoned thirty days in the
county Jail Of Kings county.