Saint Mary's beacon. [volume] (Leonard Town, Md.) 1867-1983, 1895-10-18
The Registration Cases.

The seven cases of alleged fraudulent
registration of young colored men in
Leonardtown district were heard before
Justice 10. F. Morgan, Monday last The
Court House was comfortably filled with
interested spectators. Hon. Robt G. Combs
appeared for the State and the accused
were represented by Messrs. f. n Holmes,
Joseph ii. Ching, Daniel 9. Hammett and
Z. b. Abel. The warrants in all the cases
had been sworn out by Mr.. Giles F. Dyer.
registrar, who was the frs: witness for the
State. In his testimony Mr. Dyer said that
because of the unusually large registration
of colored voters inst 81 years of age. he
became suspicious and determined TO in
vestigate. Accordingly, he went to the
church records and as a result swore out
the warrants. In two of the cases, Daniel
j. Sommerville and Peter Milburn, he had
mistaken the officiating priests for 6,
and thus erred. On this evidence the State
confessed mot guilty" as to the two parties
named. James Marshall was next put upon
" IA Is, D. -
the custodian of the baptismal records, was
sworn. The Reverend Father found the
name, but the boy on trial was not the son
OF the parents recorded and the State
abandoned the case against him. The
church records showed Frank Butler ana
VIM. Fl. Ebb to be under age, but evil
dence was adduced to prove that the boys
had been told they were twenty. one and
had registered without any fraudulent in
tent. The prosecuting attorney, after stat
ing that he thought the boys had been
clearly misled and had had no intention to
practice fraud, asked that the criminal
charge against them be dismissed. The
cases of John r. GLADDEN. and VIM. Arthur
Wilson were next tried. The church re
cords showed both parties to be under age
1t was sought TO impeach the record by
outside evidence. The cases were held
under advisement by Judge Morgan, who,
on Thursday last, rendered his decision,
saying: 1.-TWO questions were involved in
the cases. First, were the accused 81 OF
would they be 81 before the day ofelection.
Second, did they register with fraudulent
intention. As 20 the first point the baptis-
NAL record had furnished such evidence as
could not be controverted. The Judge had
talked with Wilson's mother and her recol-
lection of the circumstances of her sons
baptism agreed with the record "a to the
time OF the year and the age of the boy
when baptized. The mere recollection OF
people cannot do away with such record
evidence. If it could, record evidence
would be practically useless. In the deter.
mination OF the ages of minor children in
granting pensions, the US Government al.
ways relies first upon the baptismal records.
II that record can be found il ends the case
If there be no record, then secondary evi.
dence is taken Both of you are under 81
When You register under 81 you perpetrate
fraud upon other voters. You should
have exercised more care in determining
your ages before you attempted to register
"As TO Gladden's case, he is only Is, and
any boy Of IS ought to know that he i:
not 81.
Il have talked with your parents. Ii i.
IN evidence before me that you were told
you were 81. This causes considerable
doubt in my mind as TO your intention &c
Illegally register and as in criminal case.
the accused is entitled to the benefit of the
doubt, will discharge YOU"