Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1893-12-13
THE JAM ES RIVER.
Richmonders in Washington Seek
Ing It's improvement.
WILLIAMS SETTLE CONTEST.
Arguments In the Case Before Col. O'fcr'
rails Committee-Personal and other
Federal Capital Notes.

Irenshaw. Jr., w. l.. Whlte, ana W. IL
Curtis arrived here last night about half
past II o'clock. The object Of their Visit
was to call on Mr. Blanchard. OF Loulsi-
ana. the chairman, and the Other members
OF the Rivers and Harbors Committee OF
the House. with a view to indacing those
gentlemen to go to Richmond and inspect
a project which the commercial orenniza-
tons and people generally think ought u
be carried out in regard u further IN
provements on James river.
Shortly after arriving the gentlemen,
although II was 80 close to midnight, III,
o'Ferrall. with whom the
had conversation, and he promised g.
aid them all in his power. making an
appointment for this morning.
Arriving at the Capitol this morning the
Richmond delegation met also Representa-
tive Wise, and as Colonel OFerrall was
compelled to preside at a meeting OK his
own committee Mr.. Wise introduced the
visitors to the members OF the Rivers
and Harbors Committee.
The delegation came on to urge that an
appropriation be made for the removal OF
the big rock in the river which is such a
bar to navigation. II is estimated that 1t
will require fully 10000 to do this partlcu-
lar work. but $4,000 would be an ample
initiatory sum II Congress should author
lie that much for a starter.
MIR. Blanchard told the Richmond vis-
tors that he thought it would not be
possible for his committee to make
the appropriation for removing the rock
from the harbor at Richmond, as the
engineer corps had not recommended the
work, and the committee Is guided strictly
by those recommendations.
He. however, said the James river would
get something like the usual amount for
Cntinuing the prof CT now d r way-Ni'.,
increasing the depth of the channel to
the mouth. AS to visiting Richmond. he
and the other members OF the comnittee
said they could not make any positive en-
gagement, but after the holidays they
might be able to inspect the harbor. He
also said ne thought the total appropria-
tons in the forthcoming bill would hardly
exceed 100000, owing to the depleted
condition of the Treasury
The House Committee on Elections
met this morning. and Hon. John Goode.
of Virginia, was present. expecting that
a decision would be reached in the Mis-
souri, case of ONeill VS.. Joy. He argued
the case in behalf of Mr.. Neill the
Democratic contestant. Owing however,
TO the illness of Colonel Patterson, OF
Tennessee, who has taken special inte-
rest in the matter. the committee de-
cided TO postpone consideration until the
next regular meeting.
WILLIAMS AGAINST SETTLE.
The North Carolina case OF Williams
VS.. Settle was then taken up for argu-
ment.
Mr.. Williams was represented by Mr.
a. W. Graham. Of oxford: Mr.. F. II
Busbee, OF Raleigh, and ex-Congressmar
Hemphill. OF South Carolina, as attor'
neys. Captain Badly" was on hand him
self. OF course, and so was Mr. Settle
the sitting member. The latter was re-
presented by Major John w. Graham, OF
Hilsboro.
Congressman Bum dropped in. ant
heard some of the argument, and so die
Representative Crawford. while ex-Stat'
Senator Staples, of North Carolina, wa!
an interested listener.
Representative Woodland. OF Norti
Carolina, a member OF the Committee OF
Elections, was on hand. and the case be
ing one from his own State quite ma
turally he paid the strictest attention
to the argument and the points made.
The case was presented In the mos
earnest manner by the attorneys on eacf
side, and a report of some Of the princi
pal claims set up by the lawyers viii
ha hui ba m pY
of both parties in North Carolina.
THE OPENING.
Mr.. A. W. Graham opened on behalf OF
the contestant, the rules of the commit
tee allowing him one hour He said the
district was composed of a tier OF coun-
ties lying contiguous to the Virginia line.
The contestee, Mr.. Settle. claimed a plu-
rality. but Mr. Graham insisted he was
not elected, and the State Board of Cam
vassers erred In giving him the certificate
If the illegaly-registered votes had been
rejected, instead OF Settles having plu-
rality 1t would. be shown that Williams
was elected.
Mr.. Graham went into details in refer
ring to the voting in the several counties
The evidence In the case, he insisted
showed that the non-registered voters as
a rule voted for Settle, and remarked that
II was pretty much like the Virginia case
OF OFerrall vs.. Paul. which was decided
in the Forty-eighth Congress. He quoted
from authorities 10 provo that invalid
registration was really no registration.
REGISTRATION.
Some OF the members OF the committee
put questions TO Mr.. Graham TO find out
how the Constitution and statutes re-
lated to registration. and after giving his
answers the attorney for the contestant
said IL the contention OF his sile was
sustained 1t would be found that Mr.. VIII.
liams was elected by a plurality OF S26
Attacking the brief OF the cOntestee, Mr.
Graham claimed that Mr.. Settle practi-
cally admitted that certain people were
not qualified TO vote in State elections
but they could vote at Federal elections
for members Of Congress Mr.. Graham
thought the voter having failed to comply
with the requirements Of the law. should
not be permitted 10 vote. Several mem
bers Of the committee remarked that II
had been decided In the last Congress that
registration laws had 10 be complied with
notably in the Pennsylvania case of CRAIG
w.. Stewart.
Speaking further OF tn, registration
Mr.. Graham said the North Carolina reg
istration-laws were framed for the pro
lection Of the ballot. They required thai
man should be specific in giving hi:
place OF birth, etc. but I'm many instance:
this was neglected. The answers were
vague and general, and In a border dis
trlct like the Fifth North Carolina IL wa:
necessary 10 be specific man could no
merely say II was born In Virginia" Il
might be that such a man had been 9
criminal in Virginia, and as such HI
could not vote in North Carolina. The
same applied to men who moved from
one place to another even in North Caro-
lima.
Mr.. Graham cited the decision In Har
ris VS.. Scarborough. and others that have
attracted considerable attention in th'
State OF North Carolina.
COUNTING OF BALLOTS.
He also charged that the election Off
GERS violated a mandatory provision 81
the law. and In answer TO a direct ques
ton from a member OF the COMMITTEES
he said the ballot-boxes, in violation o.
the law, had been opened in the middl,
| OF the day. Contestee claimed the irregu
lar counting did not affect the result
In answer 10 question by Colone
O'Ferrall, Mr.. Graham said that any in
terested parties might be present durin.
the midday counting. but Mr.. Graham
thought the votes ought not 10 have beer
counted until the closing OF the polls. a.
the law provided. Any other method CAV
an opportunity to tamper with the ballot
The statute was intended primarily q
( ,.rasar,,a Tho aecracy of the ballot An In