The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1905-10-03

There were nine more witnesses ex-
amined at the First ward hearing this
morning before 1O:S0. all testifying to the
effect that, although their names were
checked they had not participated in last
Wednesdays caucus The witnesses were:
William F. McGuir. 1 Thompson street.
registry voter.
John p Reilly. LAG Tockwotten street
registry voter.
Louis samuels, 81 Sheldon street, reg
istry voter.
Benjamin Samuels. 81 Sheldon street, a
registry voter.
Thomas l.. Goff, u2 Sheldon street, reg
istry voter.
Leonard A. Mccarthy. 80 Sheldon street.
registry voter.
Daniel Myers, 10 Sheldon street, registry
voter.
Joseph +. samuels, 112 Tockwotten
street. registry voter.
Edward J. Mcmahon, 30 Blanding street,
registry voter.
Manuel swartz, 81 Pike street. said he
had voted at the caucus when he was
examined
There was scarcity OF witnesses for a
time. during which a good natured truce
around the big table resulted. and At
torney John ]. Ftzgerald's rallies were
enjoyed by all parties represented.
Mr. Dubois for the defence recalled VIII
liam T. Young. the caucus warden. who
was asked about his allowing persons to
vote when t-ey used names other than
their own, and when he said he would
allow them to vote, even though he knew
they were using another name.
YOUNG CHANGED STATEMENT.
Young said he misunderstood the ques-
tion when Mr.. Fitzgerald asked II the
other day, and that he meant that he
would not allow a man TO vote IL he knew
him TO be using another mans name.
Robert r Carroll. clerk of the Sixth
district, testified that Edward M. Sui
Ivan sat of to one side near the ballot
box nearly all evening reading paper
through blue glasses He did not see
Fynan 90 near him. he stated. although
no had quite a chance 10 look about and
see tho people as he did not have much
checking 10 do.
II was decided 20 allow an hour 70 each
side. and Mr. Fitzgerald said Mr.. Thurs-
ton and himself were to talk on their
side
Mr.. Baker ruled that the counsel con-
fine themselves TO the evidence ana not
talk politics in general, and First Ward
talk could have no weight with the board.
ARGUMENT FOR DEFENDANT
Mr. Dubois opened his argument at ll1O
and he took up the allegations separately
and called attention TO the fact that the
board found there were AIS ballots ana 4lo
names checked.
This will enable us to eliminate the alle-
cation that the names checked and the
ballots did not agree in numbers.
Mr. Dubois then took up the aHega-
ton that the warden had not allowed rep
resentatives OF the candidates 10 overlook
tho count. and said II the warden had. by
his action, done something wrongful, II is
not sufficient 10 deprive the others OF
their rights The warden could be pun
ished for his action by fine or improsin-
ment n this were true. but IL does not
appear that this Is the case.
The warden did allow a representative
OF each party within the rail, and did
not allow more because OF lack OF room.
Here Albert A. Baker made n few sug-
qestions apparently for Mr.. Dubois ben
eft and called attention TO the fact that
there were 25 candidates and II there was
"A man for each behind the rail there
would be about 30 persons.
He talked at some length In this
strain and MIR Fitzgerald blandy In
uuired II this was all IN sMr. Dubois
time.
USED THE SUGGESTIONS.
MIR Dubois made use 20 this suggestion
later and said there was scant room for
the warden and six clerks and the two
representatives behind tho rail lie said
that under the caucus law the represent
atives appointed by the candidates were
appointed and they should have tried to
get into the enclosure and II the warden
had elected them that would have been
a very different matter
That they did not do that Is not our
fault.
The chances for inaccuracy Of Mr..
count epokcn OF and