New-York tribune., 1918-04-10
Mcintyre Won
Over Delehanty,
Jury Decides
He Is Entitled to Seat on
Bench He Now
Holds
Votes I Tanapered With
For That Reason Jurors Dis
regard Apparent Dele
hanty Plurality

After trial of three months a jury
in the Supreme Court took about an
hour 10 reach the verdict that Judge
John l.. Mcintyre. now sitting IN the
Court of General Sessions, was legally
elected in November, 1916. His title
was contested by ex-Judge James A.
Delehanty, his opponent in the 1915
election. In view Of the plurality OF
about s26 votes given to Mr.. Delehanty
in the court recount the verdict of the
jury came as something Of a surprise,
The explanation. however. is found III
the statement of Charles J. Benner. il,
foreman Of the jury, who announced:
1--WE find verdict in favor Of Judge
Mcintyre. the defendant. The ballots
were not in the same CONDITION as on
the night of the elcctlon'
The determination of the long legal
struggle depended largely on this lat
ter question. Counsel for Judge Nc
lntyre contendcd that it had not been
proved that the ballots had not been
tampered with since they were cast
and that there had been every oppor-
tunity in the shifting about Of the
ballots from the Bureau Of Elections
to tho Office of the Secretary of State
in Albany and back again 0 court to
tampcr with the ballots. Justice Sawyer,
designated by Governor Whitman to
sit in the case. said in his charge:
"The vital question is, What was the
true count of the ballots on election
night? If they were tampered with
or contaminated. then you are the
judges of the fact"
Accept First Returns
Under these instructions the jury
expressed their views on this important
point. On the face Of the returns
counted on the night Of the election in
1916 Judge Mcintyre was elected by
about 800 plurality. The verdict it
was said. was not one based on the
political preference OF the members of
the jury, for as nearly as could be
learned there were on the jury six Re
pubicans. three Democrats and three
independents. Judge Mcintyre was the
Tammany candidate. and Mr. Dele
hanty. although a Democrat. was nomi-
mated by the Republicans and Progress
sives.
While the verdict Of yesterday great
ly strengthens the title o. Judge Nc
jntyre, the legal battle is not yet end
ed. and likely will go to the Court of
Appeals before it is finally settled.
After the verdict was announced yes
terday. counsel for Mr.. Delehanty asked
Justice Sawyer to set it aside on the
ground that it was contrary TO the
weight of evidence. The court will
hear argument on this motion to-day.
In view OF Justice Sawyer's refusal to
direct the jury to bring in a verdict
for Mr. Delehaniy, as requested by the
counsel OF the latter, it is quite likely
that the justice will not interfere with
The action Of the jury. allowing the
case to go to the higher courts on
the verdict.
Just" Says Mcintyre
Judge Mcintyre, who was a witness
at the trial, and said that he honestly
believed he was elected, made the fol-
lowing statement when he heard the
verdict:
81 have no statement to make of the
outcome eXcep. to say that | am very
much gratiiied at the verdict of the
jury. feel justice has been done.
never had any doubt of the outcome
because | knew from the beginning
that had won.'
District Attorney Swami was asked
last night whether he would investigate
TIE Mcintyre Delehanty case with the
idea Of revealing possible fraud.
II have not decided on that yet said
Mr.. Swami. "The nature OF the verdict,
it would seem, leaves no other infer
cncc than that the ballots were tam
pered with after the official count by
the Board of Elections in 1916"
The jury in the case presented JUS
t;ce Sawyer with clock and thanked
him for his considerate treatment of
hem dnrinr the long trial