The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-01-14

Further Hancock County Evidence
Heard Yesterday.

John L. Frey was again placed on the
stand to testify in the Stoner-Cregor con-
test when the Senate elections committee
convened yesterday afternoon, and at once
an attempt was made by Attorney HOugh
to extract from him how he voted on cleo
ton day. In the testimony he said he had
lived in Hancock county since 1858 and in
Greenfield since 1878, and that when he
moved to Indianapolis he told several
friends that he intended to return to Green
field and vote. AS he seemed adverse to
telling how he voted, Senator Gilbert said
that a majority of the committee had con-
sidered the case and would not require him
to tell how he voted but in considering the
testimony the committee would draw it's
own differences in the matter. 1t would,
moreover, he said, allow Stoner's counsel TO
prove how he voted by other testimony. The
true meaning of this remark caused per-
ceptible furry among the attorneys for Gre
gor and while each one was trying to say
something to placate the committee, Sem
ator Brooks arose, and, looking straight at
Frey, asked: What party do you belong
to?" Frey Dondered for a minute and then
said: Il am a Democrat" i've heard all
L want, so far as l myself am concerned
said Senator Brooks, brusquely, as he
turned to resume his seat. Frey was then
excused by both sides.
John Corcoran, ex-county central COM
mitteeman, and a Democrat, was then
called. He said that he had seen the can
vassng sheet the night after the board
met, and looked at it because the local pa
pers published what purported to be
the official count of the vote the same
evening, and he remembered that il did not
correspond with what he had seen on the
sheet the night before. By q perusal Of the
sheet he saw that Stoner should have been
,rfxr for Ton ha
sheet indicated he had received. He added
up the StOner column and found II was ten
votes short, and also that there had been an
erasure in one place, made apparently by u
knife He did not know who had made the
erasures.
John w. Grifiths. inspector from Phil
adelphia said he was present when the
board met in the county clerks office, and
that there We're no erasures made while the
board was in session. He further said that
he knew Of no consent being given by the
board TO the clerk 10 make any changes in
the sheet He would not have given his
consent to any such arrangement, even mad
it been suggested. He did not remember
that the clerk had made any such request.
He watched the count closely as 1t was
called off by the chairman. and when there
were discrepancies he called attention 10
them and they were rectifed. On cross-ex-
animation he said he was out for a few
minutes after the sheet had been signed,
and in hts absence the clerk might have
been instructed to rectify any errors he
might find. At this point Senators Brooks
and Hugg asked StOner's attorneys IL they
intended to prove that the tally sheet, when
produced, would not correspond with the
canvassing sheet. as. unless they did, the
canVassing sheet must be presumed to be
correct. and. no matter how many erasures
could be proved 1t would not make the
sheet wrong.
Attorney Hough said he had no doubt but
that Cregor's attorneys would produce the
sheets, but that they would not be signed.
they being the copies which are required
by law to be iiled with the county clerk for
the inspection of the public. On the other
hand he said he would produce for Stoner
a memorandum signed by all the election
officers of the eighth precinct both Demo-
cratic and Republican showing that Stoner
had received four more votes In the pre-
cinct than the eanvassing sheet gave him
credit for With this understanding Il was
agreed TO admit further testimony regard
ing erasures John X. Henby, "a Repub-
lican township trustee in Democratic
township. said he was present when the
board canvassed the vote and saw no eras-
ures made nor did he know of any arrange
ment by which the clerk was authorized 10
make any changes in the sheet James W.
Jones. of Philadelphia, testified that while
he was serving as clerk, an old man named
Breese was allowed 20 vote after he had