The Wheeling intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1903-1961, 1921-10-15
ono OF the most diseraccful m"a s"ciet
n1nS
Not a Matter Of Friendship.

Not Matter Of Friendship.
I Il know som" OF You men we'll: wan
some of you AIN intimately acquainted.
! To such members Of this jury. Yet mo
say. for Gods sake don | be influenced III
, your deliberations by your friendship
for me. or because YOU like me-. If YOU
do that. you probably will do hurley
, Thompson n grave injustice. You VIII
, disgrace yourselves If YOU du such q
, thimg.
And what ask you ~ do for M"
I I ask YOU 10 do for counsel on the de-
/ tense side cr this case. Don't hc ln1u-
enced. through friendship for me to
| return a verdict finding this defendant
! guilty. and on the other hand. don't he
! influenced. through friendship for the
attorneys on tho other side or for Eur
! 10y Thompson himself. to lind the de-
! PENDANT not guilty.
This defendants liberty is At stake
! Tho honor Of West Virginia rs at stake
! II in your deliberations you find that
| such n wrong as the state charges has
! been done. anil that Burnley Thompson Is
|
! Even If wrong was done. AMI 1t Is not
! shown tina, hurley Thompson did 1t. 'ind
him not guilty. That gentlemen Of the
jury. is your duty to society.
with that understanding. gentlemen,
! let's set down to the business ut hand.
| fairly. fearlessly and without favor
Referring brtany 70 Mr.. Rtzs talk
| Oh Fnot
! which he dismissed AS purely matters Of
law and past. Mr.. Conift proceeded 10
answer tho defense contention that the
state had Jailed to show in evidence that
4 return had been mado Of the vote
| counted al tho Fort Henry hose house
The Misdns csrtincats.
As To the certificate which Mr.. Ritz
sa!d the state failed to produce. and be-
cause Of which failure the defense
council asked the jury TO free Thomp-
son. Mr.. Conir said:
AT any rate. this certificate upon
which tho defense lays 90 much stress
Is merely a sheet upon which are set
down the total vote counted for each
] candidate. as recorded on the tally
sheets Of the poll clerks Every stroke
Of the clerks pen on that tally sheet
which you have In evidence Is q record
! OF the count made by the commissioners
Of the precinct. Tho tally sheets. which
YOU men have examined. showed that In
tho precinct at tho Fort Henry hose
house 462 votes were counted for Ches-
ter G.. Thompson and 100 ballots were
counted for Charles P. GllliSan.
DO you doubt for an Instant that the
return which We have here in the form,
Of tho tally sheets. and upon which arc
recorded every stroke Of tho poll clerks
miss!oners from every ballot counted
and do you doubt that these tally sheets
| were returned to tho city clerk. in
whose hands the law says they must be
placed!
Not only have we brought in these
original tally sheets. but we have
brought-and you have examined them
we have brought the very ballots
which correspond to the original strokes
Of the clerks pens on those tally sheets
we have shown you that these bal
| lots and tho tally sheets with these
corresponding strokes were returned to
! tho city clerk and that. based on re-
port prepared by the city clerk from his
examination Of these ballots and the
pen strokes on the tally sheets, the city
council declared the result OF the
election In Precinct Of tho Second
ward to he 462 votes for Thompson and
120 for Gilligan.
Ia In effect II IS charged by tho state
tlh this case that Gilligan was given
only 40 votes In tho Fort Henry hose
house precinct by reason OF something
that happened between G. W. Bellville
and the defendant, Burley Thompson
and that out Of ESQ people who came into
this court and testified theY voted for
| GilliEan. tho commissioners counted
only 12o ballots for Gilligau. Gilligan
therefore. we have shown was deprived
Of 1873 ballots which were voted for him,
Poll Books Show Names.
Here are the poll books from the
precinct. upon which you Jurors have
found the name Of every ono OF the c55
| witnesses who came here and testified
they voted for Charlie Gilligan on May
IS In the general election. There can
be no clubbing, as I thought Mr.. Ritz
was going to do. about whether these
witnesses voted for Gilligan at the
primary or general election. The poll
books. made up by the clerks Of the
polls themselves. show that.
| IF Chester Thompson received t6o
votes in that precinct at tho city cleo
ton, then Gnligan did not receive 252
votes. The defense had splendid op'
| portunity. II our testimony is incorrect
to demonstrate that Thompson did re-
ceiye tho 462 votes that were counted
for him. There are tho poll books with
the voters names and the address OF
every voter. Thompson's counsel could
have secured those names and addresses
from tho poll books and called In every
voter who would testify that he voted
for Thompson.
Bearing all this In mind. tho state
has shown you clearly that fasran'
fraud was committed In tho Fort Henry
hose house precinct in the city election
and Gilligan was deprived OF 1873 votes
which riehttully belonged to him. ant
that at loast that number Of qualified
voters were cheated out Of their prlri