Gloucester County Democrat. (Woodbury, N.J.) 1878-1932, 1905-11-23
CONTEMPT OF
COURT PROCEEDINGS.
National Park Election Boards Trial
Judge Jessup Holds Board IN Contempt.

Instituted by Judge Jessup against tnt
Board of Registry and Election of The
Borough Of National Park was held in the
Grand Jury room last Friday morning
The hearing attracted large number o.
people, and standing room was not de-
spised.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE.
This election board is composed of foul
persons, two Of each of the leading political
parties. They are Ellsworth Roberts and
Alton +. Cleveland, Republicans; Thomas
Platt and VIM. Lord, Democrats. Roberts
was chairman of the Board and Platt,
Inspector.
The facts Of the case are these: On the
Thursday before the late election, Edward
S. Grumley, who claimed a voting resi-
dence at National Park, appeared before
the County Board of Elections and was
given a certificate entitling him to be
registered at National Park. This certi6-
cate Mr.. Gyumley presented to the Board
before noon on election day, and the Board,
by unanimous vote, refused to accept the
certificate, and allow him to vote. This
proceeding was taken under section 25 of
the election law which provides:-
s.Sueh voter may present such certificate
to the board of registry and election of the
district in which be is entitled to vote, aud
said board shall receiye and file said certif-
cate and add his name to the registry; pro-
vided said board shall be satisfied that he
is entitled to vote in said district 2
MIR. Grumley then came to Woodbury.
and applied to judge Jessnp, sitting in
Woodbury., for . certificate under the seal
Of the cosggeIT aalssnitting him to vote.
The Jusops complied with his request
and gave theSeertifeate emitting him to
vote in National Park.
This certIncate Mr.. Grumley presented to
Judge Of election Cleveland, who in turn
handed it to inspector Platt. He did not
say it was an order from the Court, nor
make any remark. The judge informed
Mr. Grumley that the Board had considered
his case, and it was closed, and asked him
to step outside the rail.
Section 3O5 Of the eIeetionj law, under
which Judge Jessup issued the certificate,
provides:
'sIn case the vote of any person regis
tered, in any election district. has been
refused or rejected by the district board
Of registry and election, in each district, the
said court shall, upon application, in per-
son, by the person so refused or reieeted,
proceed in a summary way to inquire
whether such person is entitled to vote,
in such election district; and if the court
shall find that such person is legally en-
titled TO vote in said election district it
shall issue certificate, under its seal;
and thereupon he shall be
allowed to vote at such election. /"
Grumley came back to Judge Jessup and
reported that the Board still refused to
receive his vote, and the Judge thereupon
sent written order reviewing the case and
ordering the Board to register and receive
Grumley's vote This order Grunley read
to the Board The Boardthen took vote
and again unanimously refused to register
him and receive his ballot. Later, in
talking the matter over, the board sent
inspector Platt to the phone to talk with
Judge Jessup, and on his return sent MIR.
Baker out to find Mr.. GFumley and ask
him to return and vote, but Mr.. Baker
failed to find Cir mley
THE HEARING.
This hearing was based on rule issued
by Judge Jessup against the National Park
election board, to show cause why they
should not be adjudged in contempt Of
court, for refusing to receive the vote Of
the said Grumley on election day. Prose-
cutor Starr, by request, represented the
Court, and A. H. Swackhamer, Esq, repre-
sented the election board
Section 308 Of the election law provides
that II any bOasd of registry and election,
or any member thereof shall fail or refuse
so comply with the order of the said court
made in any proceeding taken under this
acb, such failure or refusal to SO comply
may be dealt with and punished as and for
contempt OF the court. 2
At the opening Of the case Mr.. Swack-
hamer challenged the legality Of the pro-
ceedings on the ground that the Judge did
not have authority to issue the order.
He also moved to dismiss the order be-
cause the affidavit, on nich the rule 70
show cause was issued, does not contain q
copy Of the order
For these reasons the rule TO show cause
should BE- dismissed be said
Mr.. Starr argued that they were sufficient
20 start these PROCEEDINGS, and we're sul'
hoient for this case
Judge Jessns ever-ruled Mr.
hamer's objeoe the case h