The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1904-04-30

! wns pnlled On tho speaker arA he closed
i his argument with nj, appeal TO Tie com.
nltten not to dlscredit and condemn men
whose characters Wcre 40 high, ever
/ though they had made mistakes. He
urged tho committee not to disturb the
| harmony now prevailing and restore the
old turmoil.
| reffrics's Rejoindcr.
4 A,,4 FERRIES took the floor to con-
4 cI,de Tho argument, and close tire case,
1Jo laid II down MS a fundamental prln.
1 o,n,e OF Democracy that the sovereign
viii OF the majority shall rule, When
| \ nrcc,nct Ia tainted with fraud II IL the
IRA ctlcc universally accepted III election
| cnscs To throw out the entire vote OF
| ia precinct. He rontrastcd with the nc-
| lion OF the contestccs, that Of Congress-
man John r.. shaffroth, Of Colorado, who
| had resigned his seat when 1t was shown
that his election was tainted With fraud.
| arious authorities on election contests
| oessary To show fraud In m election to
| inynltiate such election result.
Tho speaker quoted Figures as to the
number Of votes Illegally recorded, the
number voting for contestants md not
recorded at all, and tho number recorded
"A voting for contestees who we're not
oven recorded. He challenged contestees
20 say why they had not put the mem.
bers Of the electoral board on the stand
to dIsprovc or refutc charges OF fraud.
Mr.. FERRIES admitted the standing OF the
character witnesses offered bs contestccs.
but declared that no cmbezzler had ever
been exposed that coild not have brought
hundreds OF reputable witnesses as to
hls reliability. lie regretted TINT the
standards Of business and political IN.
togritv should be different; but admitted
that it was, and that men reliable In all
other matters could not be relied on IN
political life.
Mr.. ferries expressed his own doubt
Of the wisdom of the vim voce plan,
and expressed his preference for one
less susceptible to fraud. 1t was remnrk-
ablc and unhrard OF that but one clerk
should be had In n viva voce election, or
any other There must be check 10
prevent inaccuracy not to mention
fraud There was a reason for having
but ono Two clerks could not do tho
work that Ind to be done. for the reason
that their records could not be made TO
tally.
ton is emphasized by the very proVi-
sIons of that plan. Nearly all the city
committee were themselves candidates.
having charge Of their own prospects OF
election. The contestants did not ask
for anything but minority representa-.
ton. This was refused. ana that refusal
was equivalent to declaring that the con-
tcstces need hot expect fairness. 10Y
cannot call that fair play, nor good
government, added the speaker. ] a plan
like that is right IN Norfolk. 1T Is right
In virginia. Yet who would dare pro.
pose such Il plan In this committee inc
speaker applied the plan to various couh-
tics, and asked Its representatives now
they would Ike such a plan.
what the contestants had shown and as
serted that sufficient frauds had been
shown in the design adopted, In the con-
duet OF the election and In the specific
cases shown ~ the record to warrant
reversal Of the results ANNOUNCED nc
charged that the committee had been
shown by physical fncts that the tally
sheets produced by the contestees were
bogus and fraudulent. The speaker went
somewhat INTO detail in showing conclu.
svely that fraud had been perpetrated
in the Fourth Ward. He sharply ar
rnigncd the committee Of Norfolk city
and asked the state committeeman to say
whether these were tit men to conduct
tho affairs of orr party II these were
genuine tally sheets, why didn't confess
tees bring the men here In whose GUS
were aenuine7 asked the speaker.
The speaker pointed out that counsel
for contestees. although asked 10 do so.
declined 10 put Captain Dey, the custo-
dian OF the tally sheets, on the stand, and
give cOnteStces an opportunity of cross
examination OF hostile witnesses. II was
| because they knew those tally sheets
| were fraudulent, and that Captain Dcy
| would not go ON the stand and testify 9TH
4 ~ ~
| 1t vas 1855 A. NJ when time was
| called on Mr.. Jetfres and he closed his
| argument
The committee then went into executive
session TO deliberate as TO the result.
Executive Session.
1 When the committee went into execu-
! tive session, Mcssrs. L. T. Smith and
/ Robert Gillian. members Of the sub
| committee, made statements of their i'm
| presslons as TO teh evidence and what
! 1t showed. Neither was willing to declare
| the election In all four wards fraudn-
llcnt, but both admitted it was unquestion-
| ably so as To The election III the Fourth
ward. They testified that as a class the
personnel OF the witnesses for the con-
| testcc appeared to them somewhat SUI
| perior TO that of witnesses for the con-
tcstants, but there were noteworthy eS-
| ceptions to the rule. Mr.. Gillian de-
clared that the primary was wrong In
Its inception In that 1t aroused suspicion
and made fraud easy, without adequate
means of detection.
The ,S.o gentlemen were questioned by
many members OF the committee and
the term of the questions clearly showed
the attitude Of the qlestloners on The
main issue. It was not d-.-.cult to see the
result In advance. H.Et
After much desultory discussion and
question and answer the question was
called for and was had upon Mr.. Barks-
dule's motion to declare the election IN
| all four wards-the First Fourth Sixth
land seventh--fraudulen and order a new
election. This was voted down % to H..
MS follows:
Ayes Mcssrs. Lynch. Epes. James.
Hooker Helms. Burch, EgGlcston, Bnrks-
dale, Craddock, Carpenter. Lynch But
ton and Echols.
Noes-Messrs, l., r. Smith, Ailworth. G..
4 r. Jones, Sears. Wallace, G. w Homes,
Butts, Dcy, sebrell, Curtis, HARDWOOD
Winston, Fowlkes. Gillian Humphreys,
Shetman. Patton. Richards. Newman,
Booth, Janney. Gordon, Gaines.