New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-11-28
MKANE'S APPEAL DENIED.
~o1rpT OF APPEALS DECIDES UNAN-
MOUsLY AGAINST HIM.

oBRIEN HOLDS THAT NO SUBSTANTIAL
GROUNDS HAVE BEEN SHOWN FOR A
DrvERsAL OF THE JUDGMENT OF
THE LOWER COURT.
Ny 1.-THE Court Of Appeals to-day
AOa the Judgment of the lower in the
ann :. the People against John y. McKane APP
cas- uho was indicted jointly with John w.
peha" Morton Morris and John Brown Hill.
Nf os an appeal from a Judgment of the Cen
Inns Tsrm. affirming a judgment of conviction
e'" ,,orv rendered in the Court of oyer and
lo' ,sr Of Kings County. McKane was indicted
lei orrinc the inspectors of election in the
lo' Instruct Of Gravesend. at the November cleo
:, S9s 10 violate the provisions OF the Election
uo ybicb required them to keep the registry lists
hat district accessible to the public. Upon this
'.,act a Judgment OF conviction was rendered, and
.as sentenced to Imprisonment In Sing Sing
,n for six years at hard labor, which SEN
..oa he is now serving. McKane was the first
" 10 indicted under the section of the Election
,su on which the indictment was found.
IT. oninion is written by Judge O'Brien. He
avs that the appeal presents no substantial ques-
49,, which would justify the Court In interfering
9Th the verdict. and the judgment must therefore
IA affirmed All the judges concur in this decision
In writing his opinion Judge O'Brien says:
Tho facts in the case illustrate a most singular
condition OF things in local government. and an
usDt that the section OF the Election law under
Which the Indictment was found does not Apply
~ sSaressed to the Legislature before the law was
Easel The contention that IT was legally i'm
possible cannot hold good There was no direct
evidence that the defendant counseled or advised
the inspectors TO conceal the registry hs's from
u" Thai the inspectors. not only in the First Dis
well. wilfully neglected and refused to give the
public access to the lists or an opportunity to
u .,1 hat thaNs IN act
was established by abundant evidence.
After reviewing the circumstances which led up
70 McKanes arrest and Justice Gaynors effort to
&c, copies Of the Gravesend registry books, Judge
O'Bren says
The fact that so many public officers were at
the same time in the same way and by the same
means either actively promoting or conniving at a
scheme TO produce false result of the election;
some controlling mind the author; and all the
circumstances pointed 10 the defendant as that
person. He alone had the power, the means and
The singular position of power and influence nee
which he held in the town was an important TACT
in the chain of circumstances 1t would be quite
tedious to enumerate all the various offices mat
he held with the power attached o TO tee TO
say that there is scarcely any power OF local gov
that can be tba IN &as nn
rated in mis- person. and even the judicial powThr.
as, pr s n G .ne This Sufficiently appears
BY the wholesale arrests of the watchers and other
q town which contained such places of resort as
coney Island and sheepshesd Bay, private bust
h Ssstre W racecourses nd other forms of
ment or entertainment and II was all so Tar de-
pendent Pc to s poWer AND and He
was the superintendent Of the Sabbath-schooi OF
A potent Influence upon the religious life OF the
people. He had been elected supervisor OF tle
During nearly all this time he controlled the
politics OF the town. 49,. ..r
ddates that ne supported were the vote of the town
was recorded in that way. whether the election was
To;tical parties he supported the nearly
unanimous that way as scarcely to conceal the tac.
that il represented In a great degree the VIII OF
s s1red at the Presidential election in 1855
cratic party. but in consequence OF some disagree.
s me4 wh he RsspuSean that
they received substantially the unanimous vo.e
Of the IN me same way IN the two subsequent
State elections. In the election OF 1875 ne was sup
ssSmstsnces indicated that he was interested and
TO make this support as emec,Ue er ,pp co
Sng period naturally made him ambitious 10 re-
and intoleran OF all Spp8sdlSG1 to nronote the
success of all political measures and candidatess
which ne favored There was really no DIVISION Ci
town il is true what was called Republican or
ganization. we'll as Democratic orgddnslasSLol u;
but the evidence tended to show That me oeIehuat
So controlled both that neither was able or willing
10 make any earnest effective opposition 70 ms
w1shes AT the polls These facts and circumstances
with others appearing in the record eHDiacing
other acts and declarations OF the defehuaht anu
the acts and declarations Of his alleged co-conspra
tors or some OF them were all submitted 10 me
Jury under very fair charge. and the vernict must
be taken as establishing the truth or the charge
which was the main fact in issue. that the defend-
ant did aid abet counsel and advise me hspectyrs
in the misconduct and neglect Of duty stated IN inc
Indictment.
The exceptions taken at that trial. which were
urged before the Court OF Appeals as presenting
sufficient grounds for reversal are here reviewed al
length. end Judge OBren continues;
While We have discussed the questions thus ralse9
at some length. Il is proper 10 say that many OF
them fall within the statute which directs this couIt
to give judgment without regard 10 technlca eraoIs
and defects exceptions which 90 not aIect
the substantial rights of the parties IL Is eVldel
from careful examination OF the case that the ut
PENDANTS rights all guarded with vigilance ana
sedulous care. The appeal presents no substaht,lal
question that would justify this court In interfering
with the verdict. and the judgment must therefore
be affirmed