The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1895-03-06

the votes OF the people Of his distrlet .
| Aversion TO his politics. as ihiru 20,
| ,r PEOPLES candidate. formed 10 eN. 90,
| or pelliatlon for this misconduct he
neonle are e,lpreme and whog1soeVer ..ey
| rborsa 10 sclect az their rcpresehta'se'
| NOV are entitled 20 be Represented ny
| nal nerson. And no class OF pubic oi'Sei"
can lawfully disregard their Will l.,
| ~ has clearly been done III this III
stance hy these boards OF county ~ .
/ r,!ssioners And the wrong 'hes IL,
done can only be rectihed py ~, .,,''e
/ lines y Epes Of the seat ne mas az
! y,csnber OF the House Of Representatives.
and In his place seating The contestant,
| : rbor,aa Goode. who has been proved
! entitled 10 that seat.
I This report was written by Judge
Daniels. OF New York. and signed by him.
BEFORE coming to the Congress that has
tuet passed out of existence Judge Dan
| lols had for some time been judge in the
supreme Court Of New York, and one OF
the most distinguished judges in the
State
IL is impossible to read the record OF
| the Goode and Epes case without seeing
that Judge Daniels has stated what the
evidence proves most happily and exactly
1t is perfectly plain that the judges and
clerks who held the election conducted
# fairly at the precincts which were the
subject Of investigation. and 1t is just as
plain that the county commissioners
whose duty confined them to the task OF
adding up the results at each precinct
and certifying this addition TO the SecFe-
tary Of the Commonwealth usuIped an
authority to say whether lawful Votes
| should or should not be counted ana
rroceeded then to throw out enough OF
the precincts where Goode had maJorlties
TO change his majority Of lawful votes
into "A majority for Epes.
with the care of painstaking judge
Judge Daniels is particular to say tha'
their conduct exhibits probability
that there was confederation between
these county commissioners TO seize on
trivial and immaterial defects to reject
the votes Of precincts favorable 10 inc
contestant wherever that could by any
possibility be done" Judge Daniels was
far more moderate in these expressions
/ than the case before him required him
70 he. The evidence before him was bouhd
to lead any unprejudiccd mind lrresistd-
/ blv To the conclusion that conspiracy
/ was formed at some central and super
intending, quarter to get the commission
ors Of election in all the counties OF the
district to DO this thing, and that these
commissioners Of election actually put
the plan into operation and effect.
The majority of the committee have
placed their conclusion not upo1 the
ground that Epes was elected. but upon
the ground that Goode made serious CT
r.rs in preparing the evidence for his
contest and that he did not produce the
first and ORIGINAL evidence of the fraud.
They have held. after the lawyers tash-
ION. that they were not permitted to con-
cider secondary evidence so long as II
was possible to produce the first and beet
evidence. Lawyers, Of course, VIII lry
cases according TO the forms and meth-
DDS of proceeding OF their calling ana
as the gentlemen composing the majority
of this committee have declared that theif
( corscieuoes compelled them 10 close theli
ewes to the ~ascality Of the case oecauS'
it was proved by one sort Of evidence
rather than by another, we nave nothing
to say, excut that if they had had Inc
good luck to have had their conscientious
scruples called out in case III Whici
they gave an adversary the benefit Of
those scruples. they would have received
far greater credit for sincerely than 'hey
will receive here.
70 a plain man. however, rascality is
rascality, however proved, and the ras
cality of this case WAS made as plain as
day.