Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1895-10-27

rayed against the bird. Mr.. Scott came
in his official capacity as the representa-
tive OF the Police Commissioners, VINO
allotter the third column to the rooster,
while Mr.. Macfariane ana Mr.. Green APP
peared as the private counsel OF the state
Democracy. Mr.. Leventritt spoke as the
representative OF Tammray Hall, though
hs didn't say so, while General Gardiner
and Mr.. Hotc. kiss ostensibly represented
Nathan Fernbacher who obtained the or
der directing the Police Commissioners 10
show cause why they should not be per-
manently restrained from printing the
official ballots with the rooster over the
Democratic State nominees in the third
column.
The proceedings were undertaken in Mr.
Fernbacher's name, but Tammany Hall
was the real plaintiff. This fact was
only thinly disguised.
Mr.. Leventrtt began the proceedings
by stating the plaintiffs case. He said
that the State Democracy had held no
State convention, nor had IL certified 10
the Secretary of State list Of State can
didates, as provided by the new election
law. Hence the Secretary Of State had not
allotted a column to the organization on
the official ballot. as should have been
done before 1t was entitled 10 official re-
presentation.
AT the State convention. held in SYRIA
cuse, Mr.. Leventritt asserted the Tam
many Hall Democracy had been recog-
nized as the regular Democratic organizi-
ton, and the star had been adopted
and recognized as the emblem OF The
party.
George Walter Green presented an affi-
davit from Police-COmmssioner An
drews. stating that there had been no
opposition to the application OF the State
Democracy for a separate column on the
ticket. The organization has shown that
II had ratified and endorsed the can
didates on the State ticket OF the regu-
lar Democracy, and had recognized the
action of the Democratic state Conven-
ton.
A recess was taken after Mr.. Green had
finished, and when court was called TO
order again Mr.. Leventritt resumed for
the plaintiff. He said the Police Board
could not give the State Democracy the
third column on the ballot, as that coli
umn had already been otherwise assigned
by the Secretary Of State.
"One must give way" declared Mr..
Leventritt. (Which shall II petite Police
Board or the Secretary Of state? IL is
asserted that TX the State Democracy is
not allowed the third column, assigned
IL by the police commissioners, there will
question is involved. II the State Demo-
crazy is allowed this place, the question
arises: Would the votes so cast be legal?
Would those who voted that ticket not be
disfranchsed, by having their ballots
thrown OUT?
Corporation Counsel Scott followed on
the part Of the Police Commissioners.
He raised a question as TO the technical
accuracy OF the application OF the plain
tin and held that Mr.. Fernbacher had
no standing in the court. IL was not
shown that he had suffered damage or
was entitled TO redress OF any sort. The
law did not contemplate that any ire
sponsible party could come into court
with an application OF this kind simply
to see what disposition would be made
Of the case. Mr.. Fernbacher showed no
interest in this application. He did not
show that he was 10 be hindered in voting
for any candidate. or that he was to be
deprived Of any right
1T has been stated in the newspapers"
continued Mr.. Scott, that Mr. Fern
bacher Is backed up in this matter by u
rival organization OF the State Democ-
racy. These statements are reinforced
by the appearance here Of distinguished
gentlemen who narrowly escaped noml-
nation for high office at the hands OF
this rival organization" and Mr.. Scott
bowed profoundly in the direction of Mr..
Leventritt. who looked as II he were
annoyed.
IF it Is true that this rival organi-
zation is behind this proceeding" Mr..
Scott went on. ut Is certainly q queer
spectacle we see, for the only result OF
the success OF this application would be
the loss OF many votes to the Demo-
cratic party.
THE Police Commissioners last year
were mandamused TO do the very thing
that this year they have done volun-
tarlly."
Mr.. Scott quoted from court decisions
in which. under similar circumstances,
the Police Commissioners had been up
held in the course against which appllca-
ton was now made, and said that the
amendments Of 1885. to the ballot law
had made no change in the conditions
under which those decisions were render
ed Mr.. Scott also insisted upon the i'm
portance of the fact that the State De-
mocracy had been admitted to participa-
ton In the convention at Syracuse.
Mr.. Macfarlane reinforced Mr.. Scotts
arguments. and then General Gardiner
had some thing TO say in support Of Mr..
Leventritts assertions, closing the argu-
ment.
Briefs were handed up by both sides.
A decision is expected from Justice Beach
within a few days, as the question will
have to be settled in order TO enable the
Police Commissioners to print the ballots
In time for the election.