New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-02-02
ton Of the inhabitants Of the town Of Gravesend

ton of the inhabitants of the town OF Gravesend
III February. 1892. was then admitted.
Mr. Shepard offered the official reports as TO
the number Of children in the school Of Graves
end in 1898. and explained that the object was
to prove basis for the calculation Of the num-
Der OF voters. An objection came al once from
the defence. General Tracy argued for the
prosecution. saying iha, the desire was 10 show
that while the number Of the voting population
in Gravesend had almost quadrup!ed in three
years there had only been an increase Of forty
seven in the number Of school children. Here
a little tilt occurred between Judge Troy and
General Tracy. The former wanted 10 strike
ont what General Tracy had said. Then the
Whitc-haired lawyer said that Instead ~ an In
crease Of forty-seven among the school children
in three years the period Of the time was really
five years. Judge Troy. with a flushed face sat
down. evidently irritated by the statement which
had resulted from his objection.
JUDGE BARTLETT IS AGAINST NOVELTIES
The testimony after recess was corroboratiw
OF all that had gone before with respect to the
visits to Grayescnd by the men who had driven
down there from Brooklyn the morning OF
Election Day to serve as watchers in the inter-
cs,s Of Mr.. Gaynor Those who testified were
Max F.. Pamedo Louis Stober. Frank William
Balmes Dr. Jos eph H. Marshall. Mr. Hyde, OF
Mr.. Gaynor's office; Mr. Parmcnter william K.
Wa:dner and Michael E. Moore. John II. Mason.
who had charge Of the detectives sent t. Graves
end Election Day. also gave his experience.
which was In the line OF that OF Otn'rs VINO
visited the place citizen watchers.
At ) O'Clock the counsel for the people an
nounced that they rested their case. Immediately
Mr. Roderck arose and moved that all the wit
nesscs who had appeared before the Grand jury
but who had nOt been summoned u TESTIFY IN TINS
case should be required to appear for cross
examination by the defence. Judge Bartlett was
evidently surprised by the suggestion Mr.. Roder-
lex said that such proceeding was allowable In
some States. WhereupOn Judge Bartlett said. in
his dry way, that il was certainly novelty IN
New-Yor State. and he promptly overruled me
motion. The understanding was that when me
prosecution should reach the end of its testi-
mcny an adjournment should be taken until the
next day. and accordingly Judge Bartlett declared
the court adjourned until o'clock this morning.
AN IMPORTANT POINT TO BE DECIDED.
IL is not certain who will open the case for
the defence but in all probability Mr.. Roderick.
because Of his familiarity with the details, VIII
be selected for that purpose II is understood
that the first proposition will embody a law
point for prompt decision by the Court based
upon the ground that the ballot law permits
the appointment of two watchers representa-
tive Of the two principal parties. II VIII Oe
contended that two Republican watchers. living
in the town OF GraVesend were already IN the
DISCHARGE Of their duties. and that the watchers
sent by Mr. Gaynor from Brooklyn 70 Graves
end were not legally appointed, and consequently
the effort VIII be .nade 70 prove that the acuon
OF the election officials at Gravescnd in restrain
ing these men from approaching the polls not
junction papers signed by Justice Barnard or
the Supreme Court. was altogether Withln me
bounds If law No matter what may be the de-
cision II Judge BARTLETT on this particular point.
the trial IS not at all likely 10 be arrested In It's
progress at this point