Brownsville herald. [volume] (Brownsville, Tex.) 1910-current, 1928-12-13
TWO OFFICES

presiding Judge of the election to the
county clerk, IN the absence from mis-
office OF the county Judge, but that
the said county judge and commits
slOners court ~frauuuientiy failed and
refused TO consider said returns.
Exhibit T.: That $50 aliens were
permitted by the judges OF election
to vote, who had not declared their
intention of becoming citizens as re-
quired by law; that their votes were
cast Tor contestees and were received
and counted; said illegal votes for the
contestees went into the sum total
found TO have been east for the con
testees went into the sum total
testees. The names of the said aliens
so illegally voting are fully set forth
in the exhibit.
Exhibit ID: That "a persons who
had not resided in the state for one
year. ana in hidslgo county Tor SIX
months preceding che election were
permitted to vote and their votes
were cast and counted Tor contestee.
Claim Poll lax Unpaid
Exhibit T.: That l,ioi persons were
permitted TO vote in the election VINO
did not pay their poll taxes for the
yea 1921, with their own money as
required by law; that their poll taxes
we're paid by other persons, whose
names are unknown, with money not
belonging to the voter and upon false
and ~fradulent alleged powers of at
torney, not executed by the voter, and
the poll tax receipts issued thereon
were not mailed to the voter directly
from the office of the tax collector
as required by law, nor within the
time required by law. That said
voters so illegally receiving poll tax
receipts we're permitted by the
judges of elections to east their bal
lots and the same were received and
counted for the contestees and were
so reported by election officials.
Exhibit +: hat 20J persons who
could neither read, write nor speak
the English language were permitted
TO vote in said election and that each
OF said voters were assisted by cleo
ton officials, to prepare their bal
lots, in a language other thar the
English language.
Could Not Speak English
Under Exhibit / contestants for
offices further say: Contestants
would show that in Santa Rita voting
precinct the officers of election, X. o..
hinojosa, presiding judge, Jesus
BsIan, associate judge, A. r.. Munoz,
associate judge and Bernardo Baban,
clerk, Daniel c. Hawkins, clerk, Ne
mecio Bazsn, clerk and Lonldes Lon
goria, clerk, were each and all unable
TO speak, read or write the English
language; that in said voting precinct
there were cast, according TO the re.
| turns 1is votes solidly for the demo-
cratic candidates for county and dis
trict offices, w and except for the
office of judge of the 93rd judicial
district court Griffin, independent;
Leslie, democracy that there was no
candidate nominated for such office
and it was thereby necessary for the
votrs 10 write the name Of such per-
son on said ballot, il voted for in
said election for the office of district
judge; that in said voting precinct,
the voters thereof were exclusively
Mexicans and aliens, neither spak-
ing, reading nor writing the English
language, and that there was no per-
son among the said election officers
capable Of assisting said voters to
vote for any candidate; yet, notwith-
standing such fact, j.. T.. Leslie, re-
ceived ll6 votes for said office; that
CdNh Va sdiu NOtts WIZ ~IIduuulcnl
and illegal, that the name of j. h.
Leslie was written therein by some
other person than the voter and the
election officers were unable TO write
same. That the returns OF said cleo
tion for said precinct were in English
and are fraudulent; that said fraud
ulent returns of election purport to
show that said ballots so fr%audulently
yntrd yNara WAr0tunI .nA ~1l L..
the election officials and went into
the stimat and total number Of votes
counted n estimated.
Exhibit q alleges that IS voters,
who cast their votes for contestees,
we're not residents of the precincts in
which they voted and that their votes
therefore were illegal.
Ballots Thrown Out
Exhibit H-That in all voting pre-
cincts ballots lawful cast for con-
testants were unlawfully ard fraud
ulently rejected and were not count-
ed for the contestants upon trivial
grounds, such as a hole in the ballot
made by erssing of names; upon the
ground that some other csndiasIss
name was mis-spelled; upon the
ground that the pencil marking
same slipped into another column,
and upon any pretext by when q
ballot cast for contestants could be
rejected. Contestants would show
the presiding judges and tbs e,scY
ton officials generally we're oppos-
ed to contestants election and that
they used the power and influence
Of their office against them and
against ballots cast for them, 10
their detriment.
That in all voting precincts, num-
bers OF ballots were rejected, with
out reason or lawful authority, on
the alleged ground that they wore
"mutilated'; that having no access
TO the ballot boxes and having no
supervisors therein, and being r.
fused supervisors. the contestants
have no means Of knowing the exact
number Of said ballots rejected and
are unable to plead the number, but
alleges on information and belief
that the total number of such bal
lots rejected is more than $40;
wherefore contestants pray for an
inspection of all ballots cast and for
a recount thereof.
Claim Counting Error
contestants would further show 10
the court, that there was error in
counting of the ballots in each of
the several voting precincts, ana
that the counting thereof was fraud
ulent for this: That large numbers
Of ballots were cast in said election
and not accounted for on the tally
sheets and on the returns. as shown
by Exhibit II hereto attached; that
the entire election machinery for
the holding Of this election was ex-
clusively in the hands Of the parties
opposed to the election Of the con-
testarts; that large numbers Of
votes legally cast for contestants,
by persons lawfully entitled to cast
same, were not counted; wherefore
contestants pray for a recount of
the lawful ballots cast, in each of