The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1899-09-10

The brief of contestant Dockery be-
gins by stating matters upon alleged
common report, history and general
knowledge" Then he asserts that 1T
was impossible for the contestant 10
find and ascertain specific facts in each
precinct in order to allege them or
make proof of them under the allega-
lions he did make
On this ground Dockery asks that
the election held in the Sixth Congress
sional district be declared void; that he
be allowed to reopen the case and
that there be Congressional investiga-
ton to make further inquiry In respect
to his contention that the said election
should be declared nullity, asserting
that he could not obtain evidence on ac-
count of intimidation.
Replying TO this Mr. Bellamy says
in his brief: 1.-THE assertion that he
could not obtain certain evidence on ac-
count of intimidation is not sustained
by the record. A few witnesses declined
to answer certain questions, but 1T no
where appears that any alleged fears
which they stated We're warranted by
fact or just apprehension, or that amy
intimidation or other improper meth
DDS had been used towards them, or that
the contestee was in any way connected
Herewith, or that their evidence, If
taken, would have affected the result.
Nor is the motion to reopen the case
based upon sufficient grounds.
THE majority of the contesree Bella
my WAS $3.50, and to overcome it and
declare the election void there must be
sufficient and definite proof under the
notice Of contest OF such irregularities
fraud, violence and intimidation as to
justify the setting aside of the election
III TOTO
The contestant Dockery) says in his
brief there We're qualified electors kept
away from the polls who had they
dared to exercise their right to vote,
would have voted for him, enough in
number when added to the votes which
were allowed to be cast ana counted for
him to have elected him. IT was es-
sential that contiaant should prove
the above allegations to warrant the dec
laration that the election was void.
Mr. Belamy in his brief goes on to
say:
1.-THE contestant has had ample oppor-
tunity to make the proof and now con-
fesses that he has failed lie was not
diligent in taking original testimony
during the forty days allowed. His tes-
timony in chief covers only 172 pages;
his testimony in rebuttal 1914 pages He
took evidence in rebuttal in co1aties in
which neither he nor the contestee had
taken any evidence in chief. He took
evidence in rebuttal in counties in While,
he had taken evidence in chief, but IN
which contestee had taken no evid ance
in reply. He took all improper breadth
and latitude in the examination II his
own witnesses in contravenTion IS cTcly
known rule Of evidence and despite tie
objections Of contestee His counsel
asked Of his own witnesses questions
that were leading and suggestive aud
descriptive, and in the deposition of
many of these witnesses the evidence
is substantially the testimony of the eX-
amining attorney. The testimony taken
in rebuttal is filed with new natter
contrary to the simplest rules Of evil
dence and to which contestee has never
had opportunity to reply.
THE contestee insists that contestant
has had full time and opportunity to
| make his proof and that if he has failed
to do SO he has not shown sufficient