The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1896-09-09


PROOF or THE FRAUD.
We proceed now to perform our prom
Use Of yesterday 70 give the particulars
in the case Of Thorp vs. Mckinney, in
WHICH tho elcction officers srupressed
Thorp'5 vote and swened McKenney's
beyond the vote that was cast for him.
We take up first Columbian Grove pre-
| cinct, OF Luncnburg county. The returns
| showed that l0l votes were cast at this
precinct. Of which McKcnney received l5
and ThoIp "a; Lee Thornton, q %. r.
| Horner. g.. and j. Haskins Hobson' -
Twenty ballots were rejected and thrown
out. II was proved that every election
officer AZ this precinct belonged 20 tho
Democratic party, though the law re-
quires the Electoral Board TO select
the Judges Of election from the
different political parties. and there were
ten or fifteen white, and about nifty color
cd Republican registered voters thore
who could read and write, and were quail
fed TO be Judges.
It was proved that o. colored voters
voted az this precinct Of whom % voted
for Thorp, according 20 their declarations
made at the moment they voted 10 q
Republican talley-keeper who stood yhcre
TO record the way voters declared at the
time that they voted. Yet Thorp was
given only q votes, as above stated.
At Browns Store precinct. 81 voters
voted. Mckinney was given l3s 1horp,
b.: Leo Thornton. 3; b. r.. Homer, @;
and ]. Haskins Hobson. O.. one hun-
dred and twelve ballots woro rejected and
not counted. OF the 32l electors who
voted at this precinct, % were white
men. the other "a being negroes. IL was
proved tina there had been no Demo
I cratic clubs formed or meetings held in
this precinct. The Democrats being luke
warm and indifferent. while there were
Republican meetinsg and two Republican
clubs. It WAS also proved that the neero
voters at 1his precinct were almost
unanimous iu support of Thorp. a tally
sheet was kept. and z3 voters gave th4ir
names in t. The talley-keaper as having
voted for Thorp. seycnty-nve or eighty
Ct these voters could read and write. TWO
booths were kept at this precinct. and
the one in which the coiorei voters pre-
pared their ballots was furniseI with
a table which was covered with undr.od
ink. except q space about two inches
square ia one corner. The Republican
party had 40 judge. clerk, or constable
at This precinct. and one of tie Demo-
cratic clerks admitted that lpO of the ll2
ballots which were rejected were "IhorD
ballots" II was aso proved that though
3l electors appear on tho poll-hooks as
having voted only 2s ballots were re-
turned. and upon an Inspection and count
of these ballots. 90 of them were for
Thorp Containing his name on them
only unmarked, aud only III of them
were for MoKenney. 2lckenney could
not, therefore, have got as many us ia,
ana Thorp certainly got more than 5.
AT Pleasant Grove precinct. l0l votes
were cast, of which Mckinney was given
lf1. Thorn was given 2; Hornor, j; and
Hohson. o. No ballots We're rejected
here. Every election officer al this pre-
cinct was a Democrat. It was proved
that there were registered Republican
voters ~ this precinct who could read and
write. and were qualified in every way
act as judges Of election. II was also
proved that OF the lc5 electors Who were
returned as having voted. 13 are white
men and % are colored voters. It was
also proved that 50 per cent. Of the
colored voters of the county are Repub-
lioans and were supporters OF Thorp; that
the cclored voters at the precinct he
long generally to tho Republican party.
that six voters at thls precinct. whose
names are on the pon-book as electors.
can read. and knew how 10 prepare their
bailtts, and did prepare them and depos-
tied them with the judges as ballots for
Thorp. These SIX voters testified that
they voted for Thorp. II is impossible.
c%hegerore. that McKenney could have
received l24 votes, or that Thorp could
have received only two.
We shall 90 ON with extracts from this
record from day TO day.