and when I attempted to go up I would be squeezed and mashed so that I would be injured by trying to get up there. I made three attempts to get up there, but failed each time.

C. J. Croghan swears (see p. 39):

Occasionally they let one in after sticking him with pins, abusing him, and cursing him, and telling him this was no damned Republican poll.

Alfred Davis (Record, p. 52) swears he attempted to vote. "I was prevented as I started up the steps; I was struck with knives everywhere." To the same effect is the testimony of Ancrum Slater, Ransom Dicks, Monday Bronson, and others (see pp. 46 to 54). From all this testimony it must be clear that no fair election was held at Sumter No. 2. The frauds which were committed were in favor of Mr. Richardson. Allowing them to stand, we pass to

Lynchburg Precinct.

The State board of canvassers report that Mr. Lee received 181 votes and Mr. Richardson 319 votes, making a total of 500 votes. (See Record, p. 227.) But 107 more ballots were found in the box than were actually cast by the voters. (See Record, pp. 25 and 27—James Levy and R. A. Wilson.) All the managers were Democrats. By the law of South Carolina, 107 ballots were drawn from the box and destroyed, and then the 500 ballots remaining were counted. This would have been exactly just if the 107 fraudulent ballots had been withdrawn, but they were not. The result, as stated by the board of State canvassers, was, as we have already seen, 181 for Mr. Lee and 319 for Mr. Richardson. But since it is evident that a gross fraud was perpetrated here, as in other precincts, by the ballot-box being stuffed, and since all the managers whose duty it was to see that the box was empty at the outset, and to see that a fair election was held, were the political friends of Mr. Richardson, it is difficult, not to say impossible, to believe that the fraud was perpetrated in favor of Mr. Lee.

We turn, therefore, to the positive testimony, and on page 61 of the Record a list is found of those who exhibited Republican ballots, and who voted the same.

This list shows that 242 votes were cast for Mr. Lee at Lynchburg precinct, and since the report of the board of State canvassers shows that 500 votes were cast for candidates for Congress, the true vote as actually cast was for Lee 242 and for Richardson 258, in place of for Lee 181 and for Richardson 319.

By the official returns Richardson received 138 majority; but in truth and in fact he received a majority of 16 votes only. (See testimony of James Levy, Record, pp. 25 and 61; also R. A. Wilson, p. 27.)

Now, it is clear that the 107 extra ballots found in the box were fraudulent. They must have been, for there were no voters behind them. Were they for Mr. Lee? The record is silent as to who they were for.

R. A. Wilson, United States supervisor, page 28, swears the managers would not let him see the tickets they destroyed. In this he is corroborated by J. A. Rhame. (Record, 671.)

Maysville Precinct.

At this precinct the State board of canvassers give to Mr. Lee 257 votes and to Mr. Richardson 274 votes. The total vote would thus be 531.

But the poll-list showed that 539 votes were cast, and there was found

in the box 760 ballots. It is thus manifest that there was a fraud perpetrated by stuffing the ballot-box with 221 fraudulent ballots. They were Democratic ballots. V. S. Johnson swears (Record, p. 19), that in not less than ten instances "there were quite a number of Democratic tickets folded together," and "the general appearance was that they were laid in there before the voting commenced, and had not been put through the hole in the lid "; and also swears that Mr. Wilson, one of the managers and the one who counted the tickets, stated that "the tickets were hatching in the box." Johnson also swears that he saw the tickets counted, and no Democratic tickets were pasted upon the checked-backed tickets voted by the Republicans, and all the managers were Democrats; and Mr. Cooper, one of the Democratic managers, declared that the bundle of Democratic tickets "could not have been voted in the box and have to be torn up." Mr. Johnson further swears that "there was one bundle which could not go through the hole in the lid.” H. H. Wilson swears (p. 21) that he kept a book, which he produced, in which the names of the voters who voted the Republican ticket at that poll on that day were written down, and that 402 Republican votes were cast, upon which appeared the name of Samuel Lee for Congress. The names of all these voters are found in the Record on page 58 and following, as sworn to by the witness Wilson. Wilson swears he saw each of these persons deposit their tickets. (See Record, p. 22.) True it is that E. M. Cooper, one of the Democratic managers, swears, on page 698, that in his judgment Wilson could not know this fact, but it is evident that 221 fraudulent ballots were found in the box. They could not have been put through the small hole in the lid of the box. They must have been placed in the box before the poll was opened. They were all Democratic tickets. It is impossible to believe for an instant that it was a Republican fraud, since the whole advantage was in favor of Mr. Richardson and the Democratic party. It is clear as demonstration can be that it was a Democratic fraud. Under the law of South Carolina a number of ballots equal to the fraudulent Democratic excess was withdrawn from the box. It would have been honest if all of the fraudulent Democratic votes had been withdrawn, but the record shows they were not. Instead of this, 147 honest Republican votes and 74 dishonest Democratic votes were withdrawn. Since 147 honest Republican votes were withdrawn and destroyed, and 147 dishonest and fraudulent Democratic votes were left in the box and were dishonestly counted for Mr. Richardson, the fraud consisted in giving to Mr. Richardson 147 more votes than were actually cast for him and taking away 147 votes which were honestly cast for Mr. Lee.

We must correct the result as declared by the board of State canvassers by deducting from Mr. Richardson's certified vote 147 votes, and by adding to Mr. Lee's certified vote 147 votes. This will deduct 294 votes from Mr. Richardson's certified majority, and shows that the true vote at the Maysville precinct was 404 votes for Lee and 127 for Richardson, in place of 257 for Lee and 274 for Richardson. This shows that Mr. Lee's true majority at Maysville precinct was 277 in place of a majority of 17 votes for Richardson, as certified by the board of State

canvassers.

Concord Precinct.

At this precinct it is claimed by Mr. Richardsou, and conceded by Mr. Lee, that evey honest vote cast was cast for Mr. Richardson. One hundred and fifty-two honest Democratic votes were cast at this poll.

The Republicans refused to vote, because they believed the ballot-box was already stuffed before the poll was opened. All who voted there voted the Democratic ticket. This is undeniable. (See Record, p. 54.) But, strange to say, when the box was opened a fraudulent excess of 41 ballots was found in the box. They were all Democratic tickets. As no Republicans voted, and not a single Republican ballot was found in the box, it would seem to be plain that this fraud was a Democratic fraud. The excess was properly rejected, but Concord precinct may fairly be held forth as a specimen of the frauds perpetrated in this district. The managers were all Democrats. Democrats alone voted. One of the managers, J. D. Wilder, testifies (Record, p. 692) that:

The Republicans refused to vote, and that an excess of 41 ballots were found in the box when the same was opened.

He further swears that he

Did not see a single person who was recognized as a Republican voter at that poll. The only explanation of the singular facts which stand out clear and apparent at Concord precinct poll is that a scheme had been formed and organized before the election came off to deliberately swindle Mr. Lee and the Republican party in the election in that district at that time. It is the only explanation a reasonable mind can offer or suggest why such a monstrous and patent fraud was perpetrated. And here we leave the consideration of the Concord precinct, with the consciousness of having exposed a fraud as novel as it is monstrous.

Privateer Precinct.

At this precinct a comparatively fair election was held. The managers were all Democrats (Record, p. 45). Seventeen Republicans only voted there, and 127 Democrats. But when the box was opened there was an excess of 120 ballots. That they were fraudulent no man can deny, since there were no voters to cast them. Under the law of South Carolina these 120 votes in excess had to be withdrawn from the ballotbox. They were Democratic votes. In withdrawing 120 votes, 10 of the honest 17 Republican votes that had been cast were withdrawn, and only 110 of the 120 dishonest, corrupt, and fraudulent Democratic votes were withdrawn. Believing that honest votes only ought to be counted, we must diminish the vote of Mr. Richardson by 10 votes, which are counted for him in his certified majority, but which were not cast for him by voters, and increase Mr. Lee's certified vote of 7 to the 17 votes actually cast for him, and this makes a difference of 20 votes which must be deducted in truth and all fairness from Mr. Richardson's certified majority. This makes Mr. Richardson's true vote 127 votes, in place of 137 votes. This result it would seem to be impossible to dispute.

Shiloh Precinct.

By the vote as declared by the State board of canvassers at Shiloh precinct, Mr. Lee received 143 votes, and Mr. Richardson 180 votes. This gives to Mr. Richardson a majority of 37 votes, but there was found an excess of 168 votes in the box, This was a palpable and glaring fraud. But it appears by the testimony of W. E. Boykin, page 28, that at least 189 votes were Republican, “and Samuel Lee's name was on every one of them”; and that 134 Democratic votes were cast, making a total of 323 votes. But this gives to Mr. Lee a majority of 55

votes instead of a majority of 37 for Richardson; and so Mr. Richardson's assumed majority must be decreased by 92 votes. (See also Record, p. 26.)

Rafting Creek Precinct.

Here, as usual, all the managers appointed by the county commis. sioners were Democrats. One of them, however, Mr. McLeod, did not serve by reason of a broken arm. (See Record, p. 34.) Prince A. James, a colored man, was chosen by the other two managers, both Democrats, to fill his place. (See Record, p. 15.) A fair election appears to have been held, by all the testimony given in evidence. The result was that for Lee were cast 313 votes, and for Richardson, 51 votes. This gave to Mr. Lee a majority of 262 votes. (See Record, pp. 33 and 249.)

The returns and ballot-box were placed by the managers in the hands of Prince A. James to be delivered to the county commissioners. But on the pretext that James had not been appointed by them as one of the managers, these sternly righteous commissioners refused to count the vote at all, and threw out the entire poll! (See testimony of D. J. Winn, pp. 7 and 8, and E. P. Ricker, pp. 47 and 48.)

Your committee believe that an immense majority of all honest Americans would say at once, since no one questioned the integrity of the election at Rafting Creek poll, Mr. Lee's majority ought to be counted for him. Your committee feel that they are compelled so to count the vote; and Mr. Lee's majority of the honest votes, honestly cast, honestly counted, honestly returned, but rejected by the county commissioners, was 262 votes.

Carter's Crossing Precinct.

At this precinct, as in all the precincts of the county, the managers appointed by the county commissioners were all Democrats. (See Record, pp. 8 and 47.)

At this poll Mr. Lee received 47 votes, Mr. Richardson received 29 votes. This would give a clear majority to Mr. Lee of 378 votes. (See Record, pp. 23, 249.)

Dr. Henry Stucky, one of the Democratic managers, swears (p. 18.) that the election was fairly held; that the two supervisors, one a Republican and the other a Democrat, were present all the time; that the managers adjourned once for breakfast and once for dinner, about twenty minutes (Record, pages 24, 18), and left the box in the custo y of these two supervisors, one a Republican and the other a Democrat, J. Nelson Carter, one of the two United States supervisors, swears (Record, p. 23) that while the managers were absent no one touched the ballot-box. The poll-list kept by the Democratic managers and the two United States supervisors exactly agreed. (See Record, pp. 23 and 249.) But because of the adjournment by the Democratic managers for breakfast and dinner, E. P. Ricker, one of the county commissioners, swears, on page 48 of the Record, that "Carter's Crossing precinct was rejected on the ground that the managers adjourned for breakfast and dinner"! Since no witness controverts the facts as stated here, your committee is compelled to correct and count this poll and give to Mr. Lee 407 votes and to Mr. Richardson 29 votes, thus counting for Mr. Lee a majority of 378 votes at Carter's Crossing poll.

We summarize, so far as Sumter County is concerned: The State

board of canvassers (Record, p. 228) certify and give to J. S. Richardson 2,560 votes and to Samuel Lee 1,789 votes. This would give to Mr. Richardson a majority of 771 votes, and this majority goes to make up Mr. Richardson's majority in the district of 8,468 votes.

But since your committee have analyzed the vote of this county of Sumter, so far as all the disputed precincts are concerned, they find and summarize as follows:

This gives a majority in Sumter County to Lee of 1,877 votes, in place of 771 majority for Richardson, as accorded him by the State board of canvassers, and shows conclusively the extent of the frauds perpetrated.

WILLIAMSBURG COUNTY.

The secretary of state counts, in his report, the county of Williamsburg as follows:

For Mr. Lee 1,585 votes and for Mr. Richardson 2,084 votes. This would give to Mr. Richardson a majority of 499 votes. But on page 228 of the Record he certifies that "no managers' returns from any precinct in Williamsburg County are on file in his office;", that "none were sent by the county canvassers of said county."

But the positive statute law of South Carolina is that

After the final adjournment of the board of county canvassers, and within the time prescribed by this act, the chairman of said board shall forward, addressed to the governor and secretary of state, by a messenger, the returns, poll-lists, and all papers appertaining to the election. (See Stat. of South Carolina, sec. 4, act of 1872, vol. 15, p. 171.)

It appears that three of the precincts of this county, to wit, Gourdin's, Midway, and Salter's, were thrown out, and not counted by the board of county commissioners. But it appears by the testimony of Capers