ADAMS COUNTY. The returns from Dead Man's Bend precinct were rejected by the commissioners of election on the ground that there was no list of voters set up with the returns by the precinct officers. At page 75 of the Record, William J. Henderson, one of the commissioners of election, testifies that the vote of that precinct was: For Lynch, 85; for Chalmers, 15. (See also Record, page 88.) We think the vote of this precinct should be counted. It was rejected for unsubstantial reasons; no fraud is charged, and it would, to our mind, be the grossest injustice to deprive the voters of their right to participate in a choice for their Representative on this ground. Palestine Precinct. As to this precinct, Mr. Lynch proves by William J. Henderson, at Record, page 75, of his testimony, that the box was rejected because there were 35 more ballots found therein than there were names on the list of voters kept by the clerks. Mr. Henderson says: The Palestine returns were rejected because the box contained 35 more ballots than were accounted for in the list of voters as kept by the clerks. To the best of my recollection, the inspectors sent up their returns, stating that there were in the box 17 votes for Chalmers and 270 votes for Lynch, the latter number including 35 votes which were found to be in excess of the list of voters as kept by the clerks. Lennox Scott, another witness, who was a United States supervisor, testifies, on Record, page 187, that to his own personal knowledge 231 votes were cast at this precinct for Mr. Lynch. An effort was made to explain how the excess of 35 votes appeared. The evidence on this subject is not very satisfactory, but we think, on the whole, that Mr. Lynch should receive 231 votes and Mr. Chalmers 17 from this precinct. (See also Record, page 191, testimony of H. C. Bailey.) BOLIVAR COUNTY. Under section 138 of the Mississippi code, the inspectors of elections are required to send up to the commissioners the whole number of votes cast at the poll, and the commissioners under section 140 of the code are required to "transmit to the secretary of state, to be filed in his Here, a statement of the whole number of votes given in their county It ch candidate." The a duty being enjoined by statute, their certificate is evidence of that tht that the number of votes which they certify were given. That cincts was put in evidence, from which it appears they returned Lynch polled, almers 301. It further appears by a certificate signed by the the canvioners of election that they threw out Australia precinct, consupervi30 Democratic votes and 192 Republican votes, because the rewho shere "not certified to by the inspectors or the clerks." certifi thes in Bolivar Precinct. appears from the same certificate that in this precinct they rejected ma Democratic votes and 311 Republican votes for the same reason. Another informality is noted, which is that the "tally sheets" were kept on four pieces of paper, and that they do not show what offices the persons whose names appear on the tally sheets were voted for. This can hardly be considered to be a good ground when the ballots were before them, and they could have looked and seen. Holmes' Lake Precinct. As to Holmes' Lake precinct it appears that the ballot-box was never opened, and the ballots counted by the inspectors and clerks. The commissioners refused to open and count the votes, and perhaps were not authorized to do so by law. The voters of this precinct are deprived of the right to participate in the choice of their Representative, by the conduct of their present officers. Glencoe precinct was rejected because the vote was not entirely counted on the night after the election, and the returns were signed by only two of the election officers, not a majority. The commissioners certify that these imperfect returns show that 27 Democratic votes and 233 Republican votes were rejected on account of this informality. In right and justice these votes ought to be counted, but we do not do so on the statement made by the commissioners. ISSAQUENA COUNTY. There are two statements in the record, which, taken together, enable us with reasonable certainty to arrive at the vote cast in three of the four rejected precincts of this county. The first is the certificates of election made by the commissioners of election to the secretary of state, and found on page 17 of the Record. Hay's Landing. They say with regard to this poll that they find 75 votes reported by the election officers; on four of the ballots all the names are scratched off, and they reject the poll because there was no separate list of voters kept. At page 89 of the Record, Richard Griggs, clerk of the chancery court for Issaquena County, certifies, under the seal of said court, that the paper appearing on that page of the Record is a true and correct transcript of the election returns made by the election officers as appears of record in his office, by which it appears Chalmers received 34 votes and Mr. Chalmers 29 votes for member of Congress. The commissioners of election for that county certify to the secretary of state that they rejected this precinct return, and the clerk of the court certifies that that return is on file in his office, a copy of which he gives. The two statements taken together are prima facie evidence of the vote received at that poll. The highest number of votes appearing on the tally-list as certified by the clerk agrees with the number the commissioners say were returned from that poll. The commissioners are authorized by law to certify as a fact the number of votes cast; and the clerk of the court is authorized by law, as the keeper of public records, to give certified transcripts thereof. For the reasons given in reference to Hay's Landing precinct, we also count Ben Lomond and Duncansby precincts; by reference to which it will be seen that Lynch's vote was 332 and Chalmers's 20 in the former (Record, pages 17 and 90), and 371 for Lynch, and for Chalmers 45, in the latter. JEFFERSON COUNTY. The only precinct in dispute in this county is the Rodney precinct poll, the vote of which is admitted to be 247 for Lynch and 92 for respondent. This is shown also by the report of the commissioners, at page 19 of the Record. Having come to a conclusion adverse to contestee in reference to marked ballots, we count this poll as returned. WASHINGTON COUNTY. The evidence in the Record, at page 23, shows that the Stoneville precinct was rejected by the commissioners for want of a statement signed by the inspectors of election. Page 206, John Jones testifies that at this poll there were 315 cast for Mr. Lynch and 60 for Mr. Chalmers. He says: "I saw the votes counted, and know that to be the fact and correct." This testimony is uncontradicted, and is sufficient to put the returned member to proof to show why the vote should not be counted. It was the unquestioned duty of the inspectors to make return of this vote as it was cast. The election appears to have been conducted in a quiet and peaceable manner, and no sufficient reason having been given by the commissioners of elections why they did not return the vote, we think it right and fair to count it as the testimony shows it was cast. As to Lake Washington and Refuge precincts, there is no testimony in the Record showing what the vote as cast was. If the supervisors' returns are rejected, and the contestee's exceptions sustained, it leaves us without means to ascertain the true vote at these precincts. COAHOMA COUNTY. In this county the commissioners in making the certificate to the secretary of state omit to state what the vote was in the rejected precincts. There were elections held in seven precincts in this county, six of which were rejected by the commissioners, and one, Friar's Point, was counted. There is in the Record, at page 98, a certificate made by R. N. Harris, clerk at the circuit court, giving a transcript of the tally-lists signed by the inspectors of four precincts: Clarksdale, which shows that Lynch received 307 and Chambers 117 votes; in Sunflower, Lynch received 32 and Chambers received 77; Dublin, Lynch 70, Chambers 63; Mag. nolia, Lynch 109, Chalmers 23. At the Delta precinct the inspectors and clerks did not count the votes, and this box was, therefore, in the same condition as the one at Holmes Lake. The Jonestown precinct is omitted because the clerk fails to certify. The clerk's certificate is probably evidence that these papers are on file in his office, and that they are the returns sent up by the precinct election officers. As to whether they are evidence as to the fact whether so many voters voted for the persons named for the offices named is submitted to the House. FRAUDULENT RETURNS. At Kingston precinct, in Adams County, it is conclusively shown by the testimony of Jerry Taylor, Henry B. Fowles, Abraham Teltus, Smith Kinney, Harry Smith, jr., and William H. Lynch, that the vote as cast was 350 and for Chalmers 59. The vote as returned by the precinct election officers was Lynch 160, Chalmers 249. It is shown that there was abundant opportunity for tampering with this box at the noon recess, when it was taken to the residence of one Dr. Farrar, and the Republicans were excluded from the presence of the box, and the aperture was not sealed. The Republican inspector who had the key could not have stuffed the ballot-box in its absence. We think under the evidence this vote should be corrected so as to show the true vote as cast, as testified to by these witnesses who are uncontradicted. We therefore add 190 votes to Mr. Lynch's aggregate and deduct that number from Mr. Chalmers. The corrected vote of the parties will stand thus: And add that number to Lynch's vote to correct the returns in 190 Which makes total... 9,735 9,350 Majority for Lynch 385 We have not added the vote of the rejected precincts in Coahoma County, as shown by the clerk's certificate, nor have we corrected the vote in Robb's precinct, in Washington County, where it is charged the ballot-box was tampered with, and about which there is a conflict of testimony. In three precincts in Adams County it is claimed the returns should be thrown out because of mismanagement, misconduct, and abuse of power on the part of the managers in contestee's interests, and peace officers and challengers acting on behalf of and in contestee's interests. And at Washington precinct, in Adams County, they excluded the United States supervisor of elections from the presence of the box from the time of adjournment in the evening to the time of commencing the counting of the vote in the morning. In precincts of Court-House and Jefferson Hotel it is claimed that the Republican voters were prevented from voting by a systematic course of vexatious questions and inexcusable delays, whereby 300 or 400 voters were prevented from voting at all. The evidence on this subject is conflicting, and doubt exists in the minds of the committee whether it is sufficient to exclude these boxes from the count, and we therefore decide to let them stand. As to Washington precinct it may be gravely questioned whether it ought not to go out, but as it can make no difference in the final result we decide to let it stand, If the precincts in Coahoma County shall be counted the tabulated statement would be as follows: And add that number to Lynch's vote to correct the returns in 190 Which makes total.... 9,735 9, 350 If you add the votes as shown by the supervisor's returns the follow And add that number to Lynch's vote to correct the returns in 190 These tabulated statements are made for the information of the House. The first tabulated statement shows the result which the undersigned members of the committee all concur in, and upon which the report is based. Your committee therefore recommend the adoption of the following resolutions: Resolved, That James R. Chalmers was not elected, and is not entitled to his seat in the Forty-seventh Congress from the sixth district of Mississippi. Resolved, That John R. Lynch was elected, and is entitled to his seat in the Forty-seventh Congress from the sixth district of Mississippi. W. H. CALKINS. A. H. PETTIBONE. GEO. C. HAZELTON. J. M. RITCHIE. |