The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1902-04-30

A..x-n-ll#s.As.1-1X1 EG-kN11=AasN
IN lnird precinct, Clay WARD, S respon.-=s
Epps; ora total divergence between
nv asoSRe IN Ere s1S 9es 's
The petiuoner#ne ext states tina s.
E22 2, 80 our plan directs that judg shall
"a violation that the said w. Z. 1ea man
was an aYowed candidate Tor Ponce
COMMISSIONER and interested In &e1ecung
Smith, whom he strongly supported. - n
order to preserve the plan antac from
any improvements by eutoner, your re-
one word is omitted in petitioner ex-s
tract therefrom. The plan provides that
Judges and clerks shall not, bedirect1y
were not interested" in the election. Sil.,s
committees objection was to one 'ds-
rectly.' interested. or.1nstamce being a
candidate at that election. The interest
alleged by petitioner is that said Leamans
is an avowed candidate tor Police Com;
missioner, an officer to be elected by. the
the direct interest alluded to In the plan5
! How such indirect interest in the. Coun.3
( cilEcould have affected the vote for. City
asks to be thrown out, respondent Is not
informed. The nearest approach to an
allegation Of direct interest Is :, that said
y
dent: but your respondent does not be-
lieve that your committee intended that
Leaman, like every one else. could not.
have had his preference Continuing, the:
petitioner recllessly alleges that said w.
P. Leaman, in order to have complete.
control of this precinct and avoid all de-
lection of misconduct at this precinct,
got his brother, the said J. R..Leaman,5
as superintende nt of the ward. to appoint
said T. Wiley as clerk when the s Az
said Wiley was not a resident of j acksolli
Ward that for years he had been sepa-s
rated from his family, and has had no
that about eighteen months ago he re-
resided resided a: at the home Of his wife in Jefer-
son Ward, at 231012 Venable Street But.
rot satisfied with thus Illegally appoint-
ing TINS nonresident OF jackson ), W va.
him to vote Illegally and fraudulen.ly
as living in 1215 North Seventeenth Street,
which is the ~, home Of said J:.R-sLea:raa ian,
your petitioner is informed and believes
that this gross and bare-faced fraud was
perpetrated in the interest of ME-. G.
Leaman was endeavoring to elect
AS a matter, of fact. which will be
S to your honorape b3dX SAID II
for the past eight years; that he does
reside in fourth precinct, jackson Ward;
that it is false that he has resided for
bic Street. AS the statements upon which
petitioners charges are based are abso-s
lutely false, it follows that his differences
are equally untruStWorthy.
The petitioner next alleges that the
said w. P. Leaman has boosted that he
scatched nearly one hundred ballots at
this precinct for voters, and your petit
toner charges that the wishes Of the IL.
literate votes was not carried out by
ali all such Ballots scatched by him, the nc
ballot was illegally and fraudulen:;S,
scratched according. to the will of sad
w. 7. Leaman and as evidence of this
your petitioner asks that the ballots be
inspected, and wherever the Council ticket
supported by the said w. P. Leaman was
voted for, your petitioner would not get
one out of ten of these ballots, which re-
suit was due to the illegal and fraudu-5
lent conduct Of said W. P. sLeaman.
The e, Council ticket supported by the
said w. P. 5Leaman in this way was "A.
er-inzlaw Of the, said w: P. Leaman; 6.
n Pollock, John Teefey and NJ T..
FAIR EXAMPLE.
This section is a fair example Of the
tone of the entire petitioner Petitionei.
to all varieties of statements and charges
of fraud for which there is no foundation,
but this Inference is SO fanciful that even
petitioner stops and doesn't say that ne
believes" but merely argues AS the
ballot-box. has been kept sealed there. is
NJ 5e stat way Of
the Council ticket supported by the said
". T. Leaman was voted for the petit
these ballots. which result was due to the
illegal and fraudulent conduct Of said w.
P. Leaman.'' Were this allegation (if
such 1t may be ealled te it would have
for for five men men can't be persuaded to vote
ally e Calls attention. "n t to he fact tRat M
John Tecfey. one of said $Councimen. Ge-
MES that said w. P. Leaman supported
him.
of marking 100 ballots contrary to the
voters. intention, and not an iota Of eyl-
to matter he couldn't know.
2 The petitioner charges that while
son, l Unknown to him, effercd to toy vote"
&c, &c, On such indefinite, intangible
reports are serious charges based.
dent; your respondent denies that he
dent calls for proof.
4. The petitioner next shows that he SIS
Informed that whenever an election takes
place in the city R. l.. Cyrcle, the reg
lstrar at smithers precinct, in Henrico
cinct SO notorious that its name was
changed to Towards Grove, was in the
habit of lending transfers to certain pre-
cincts in the city, and the loan was re-
turned whenever the county election would
come off,
AS it is not alleged that the petitioner
| is even Informed that such transac-
tions took place at the recent primary
election. it is outside OF this case and
was only intended to create prejudice
The petitioner next charges that .'the
said Cyrcle has for several years been
working in Newport News, Va, but that
| two weeks previous to said primary he
came to this city for no other purpose
| than to labor in behalf of Mr.. j. c..
| Smith, who at one time employed him
| to run a junk shop for years in this
| city,
This allegation is absolutely false. Said
| Cyrcle has been in this city for the last
| six months, and was never employed to
run a junk shop for respondent.
| The petitioner next charges that "thG
! said Cyrcle illegally and frauduien1ly is
| sized just previous to said primary many
l illapal transfers n yO11Yz ,,atj-