jority in the spring election in 1882 than in the fall election of 1882, and there was a greater majority at our last election than there was in the fall of 1882.

Q. What was the difference?-A. From what I can remember I think the difference between the last election and the November election must have been somewhere in the neighborhood of 20.

Q. Difference between the election of October?-A. The November election and this last election.

Q. About twenty?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Then there could not have been

What did Mr. English suggest to you just

then? A. I said I could not remember the number.

Q. Then there could not have been a loss of one hundred votes on the November election, could there?-A. There might have been, because the sentiment in favor of the Democratic ticket was very much stronger at that election than it was at last October election; the voters may have been inclined at that time because of the issues to vote the Democratic ticket, and at this time probably some of them voted the Republican ticket.

Q. Do you know what the majority for the Democratic ticket was there at the April election in 1882?—A. I do not recollect exactly.

Q. Was it 50?-A. I say I do not remember. I have not charged my memory with it. Q. Was it 75 or 100?-A. I could not remember, as I told you.

Q. Do you know that the majority for Mr. English at that precinct in that ward in 1882 was over 60 ?—A. I do not know that. I do not remember it now.

Q. I hold in my hand a table published in the Indianapolis Journal, which Austin H. Brown says is a more correct table than that published in the Sentinel, and that shows that Mr. English had 62 majority in the November election in 1882; is that right or wrong?-A. I should say it was right.

Q. Can you state whether or not that would be a lesser or greater majority than was given for the Democratic ticket at the April election in 1882?-A. It is my impression it was a smaller majority.

Q. How much smaller would you say?-A. I would say from all the circumstances I observed there it was at least one hundred.

Q. At least one hundred smaller?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Now, do you know anything about it as a matter of fact?-A. Of course I do from my impression.

Q. What was the Democratic majority down there at the April election, 1882? How much greater was the vote at the April election, 1882, than it was in November, 1882?— A. I do not remember the figures.

Q. You cannot tell?-A. No, sir.

Q. How much greater was the vote at the October election in this city at the last election than it was in 1882?-A. I do not know the figures.

Q. I ask you how much greater the vote in the April election was than it was in the November election, 1882, and you said it was about one hundred?-A. I would not state that without comparing the figures of the elections of 1882, because I do not know the figures in the one case or the other. If I knew the figures in the April election I would

be able to state.

Questions by Mr. WILSON:

Q. You said in answer to Mr. Peelle's question that the number of votes at the November election in 1882 was less than the others--that the majority was less?-A. Yes, sir; that the majority was less.

Q. You say the sentiment was stronger then for the ticket than at any of the other elections. You mean stronger at the November, 1882, election than at any other election?

(Objected to.)

A. I would say that the sentiment in favor of the Democratic ticket was stronger than it was in the spring election of that year. It was certainly much stronger than it was at the last October election.

Q. So that the vote was better organized in November, 1882? (Objected to.)

A. I thought so.

Q. What sentiment do you refer to when you say the sentiment was stronger? (Objected to as immaterial and nothing but sentiment, and not rebuttal of any evidence brought out by the contestee.)

A The question at issue took on considerable of the prohibition character, and for that reason a large number of voters, particularly Germans, were inclined to vote with the Democrats.

Q. Who had not voted before; is not that true?

Q. That same sentiment you refer to was greater at the April election in 1882 than it was in November, 18-2?-A. I think not.

Q. Was not that question new in April, 1882, and was not that the first campaign made on the sentiment you refer to ?-A. Yes, sir.

JOHN MALONEY, being first duly sworn, testified as follows:

Direct examination by Mr. WILSON:

JOHN P. FRENZEL

Q. State your name, age, and residence.-A. John Maloney; age, 55; residence, Indianapolis, Ind.

Q. You are the same gentleman who testified in this case in chief for the contestant?— A. Yes, sir.

Q. You testified there that you were one of the election board at the second precinct of the seventeenth ward?—Yes, sir.

Q. Do you know Mr. John Wahle ?-A. Yes, sir; he is a German down there in my ward.

Q. Did you see him on that day?—Yes, sir.

Q. I will ask you his condition on that day, if you saw him, as to whether he was drunk or sober, or what?-A. He was sober when I saw him. What I call a man sober is when he is in his reasonable mind and good sense, and acted like any sober man would. Q. You were one of the judges there?-A. Yes, sir; I was one of the judges on that board.

Q. Did the judges on that board refuse to accept any affidavit offered them? (Objected to.)

A. Not the judges, but the inspector.

(Objected to as not rebuttal.)

Q. Did the judges refuse?—A. No, sir.

Q. I will ask you whether or not the policemen there did any challenging or interfered with the election?

(Objected to as not rebuttal, &c.)

A. Yes, sir; there was two or three there that was challenging and cautioning men as they came up to vote that they must be careful; that they did not belong to that ward. Q. Do you recollect the names of them?

(Objected to for the reasons before stated.)

A. There was Len Crane and a partner of his.

Q. You say it was his partner? A. Yes, sir; a man that used to be a partner with him. He was a sandy-complexioned man.

Q. Was it Robinson or Gerber?-A. Gerber was the man.

Q. Did the inspector there refuse to take any votes sworn in?

(Objected to as leading and not rebuttal.)

A. Yes, sir.

Q. How many of them?

(Objected to as leading.)

A. The man Wahle made out an affidavit that was brought in there and was rejected, and the inspector would not take them.

Q. Who would not take them?-A. The inspector.

Q. Do you know how many votes were lost by that?

(Objected to as leading and not rebuttal.)

A. About as near as I possibly could come, if you will allow me to explain what I really think, is, I suppose there would be in the neighborhood of about 100.

Cross-examination by Mr. PEELLE:

Q. Were there votes sworn in by any one?-A. There were votes sworn in, but they would not be received.

Q. How many men's votes were sworn in?-A. I am not saying what amount was sworn in, but I am speaking about the intimidation from the men, and they were threatened and they were lost; and the ignorant German or ignorant Irish, &c., that came up there, and there was even Americans

Q. How many men were rejected that were sworn in there that day?—A. There was at least 7 or 8; very close on to that many.

Q. How many?-A. About 7 or 8 that this man Wahle came up there and signed the affidavit for, and the old man rejected that, and would not have anything to do with them at all.

Q. The other men you referred to were men who had simply been challenged ?—A. They were scared off out of the chute.

Q. Were they challenged?-A. They were challenged, sir,

Q. How many were challenged and afterwards sworn in?-A. The challenger

Q. I admonish you now to answer my questions. Were they sworn in after they were challenged, any except those you have mentioned?-A. No; those were not. They were not sworn in.

Q. You were inside of the room all day?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. You do not know where this man Wahle was during that time?--A. He was outside there. They brought him up to make some affidavits.

Q. You do not know anything about his drinking if you were upon the inside?—A. I could not tell the balance of the day, but while he was there he was sober.

Q. While you were on the board inside you do not know anything about whether Mr. Wahle drank, or if he drank anything?—A. I saw him during the time they made this rejection.

Q. I ask you the question, I ask you whether you know this man Wahle drank anything during the time you were on the board?-A. I do not; all I can tell was from the appearance, from what I saw of the man; I could not follow him right around.

Q. Did the inspector refuse to receive votes sworn in by Mr. Wahle because he was under the influence of liquor?-A. Yes, sir; that is what he said.

By Mr. WILSON:

Q. Were you in an attitude to know as much about the soberness of Mr. Wahle as the inspector? A. Yes, sir; and more so, because I had two clear eyes and he had only one, and I could see better, and very few men can see the distance off that I can see. JOHN MOLONEY.

W. M. HICKLIN, being first duly sworn, testified as follows:

Direct examination by Mr. WILSON:

Question. You are the same gentleman who testified for the contestant in chief?—Answer. Yes, sir.

Q. You said in that evidence that you were at the second precinct of the seventeenth ward? A. Yes, sir.

Q. And you were there all day, pretty near?—A. Yes, sir.

Q. I will ask you whether or not you saw there that day Mr. John Wahle, or if you know him?-A. I do not know him by name.

Q. A German who was swearing in votes there?-A. I do not know him by name. Q. Did you see a gentleman there swearing in votes for the Democrats that day?—A. Yes, sir; I saw two.

Q. What were their names?-A. One was that saloon-keeper on the corner-Schoettle. Q. Who was the other?-A. I think Mr. Wahle.

Q. What was the condition of those two gentlemen that were swearing in votes as to intoxication; were they intoxicated?

(Objected to as not rebuttal.)

A. They were not when they were at the polls, in my judgment.

Q. Did you see any police there that day?

(Objected to as not rebuttal.)

A. I did.

Q. Did they take part in that election?-A. They took a very active part in the election.

Q. Did they challenge any votes?-A. They challenged several votes.

Q. Were there any affidavits offered there in behalf of the Democratic voters that were rejected?

(Objected to as not rebuttal.)

Q. Were there any affidavits refused by the inspector; did he refuse to receive any affidavits as to any voters that had been sworn in?-A. Yes, sir; they did. Mr. Hetherington was one of the judges.

Q. He was inspector, was he not?-A. Yes, sir; he was inspector. He was known as one of the judges of the election. I do not know what they call them here.

Q. Did those men get in their votes whose affidavits were offered?-A. They did not, and I kicked.

Q. Do you know how many votes there were of that sort?—A. I do not.
Mr. PEELLE. What sort do you mean?

The WITNESS. Those that were actually voters, and by virtue of the police and by virtue of the intimidation of the men whom we had to swear in votes we lost a great many votes. I know that.

H. Mis. 23-31

Q. Do you know how many?-A. No; I cannot tell how many.

Q. You mean you cannot give the exact number?-A. I cannot give the exact number. That is what I mean.

Q. Can you approximate it?

(Objected to as not rebuttal.)

A. I think if we had had a lot of men like we have out in Missouri, where I was born and raised I think there would have been fifty or sixty more votes polled there for the Democratic ticket. Democrats here-like those are in the seventeeth ward-are somewhat backward about voting, and, of course, a man like myself—I should have voted.

Cross-examination by Mr. PEELLE:

Q. Did you see any man's vote refused there who had been sworn in ?—A. I did. e saw a man whose vote had been sworn in and an affidavit came there from a responsibl party that was rejected.

Q. What was his name?-A. I do not know what his name was.

Q. Do you know where he lived ?-A. I do not know where he lived.

Q. Do you know whether he was a voter in the ward or not?-A. I know that one man at the chute, and that was Mr. Bryce, and he was councilman there from our ward, and a Republican and the meanest one in the ward-and he spoke out and said: "I know that man is going to vote the Democratic ticket, but he is a voter, and you ought to let him vote," and the policeman on the other side challenged him.

Q. Mr. Bryce is the meanest Republican in that ward?-A. He is the strongest Republican I know of.

Q. Is that a Democratic ward?-A. No, sir.

Q. Is not the precinct Democratic?-A. No, sir.

Q. Did not it go Democratic last fall?-A. No, sir; I tried it.

Q. Did not the whole ward go Democratic in 1882?-A. I am talking about the last time.

Q. Is it the October State election where you are talking about that the votes were rejected?-A. I am talking about the October election where votes were rejected; that ward is Republican.

Q. Mr. Wilson was asking you about the Congressional election of 1882.—A. I am aware of that, and that is what I am talking about.

Q. Do not you know that that ward went Democratic in 1882?-A. It went for English; yet it is not a Democratic ward.

Q. Did not it go for every Democratic candidate in 1882?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Mr. Bryce has carried that ward three times for council, and is now councilman from that ward?-A. I believe he is.

Q. Do you know of another voter down there whose vote was refused after he had been sworn in other than the one you mentioned?-A. Yes, sir; I saw them sworn in. Q. I mean men who were challenged and sworn in. How many of that kind were refused? How many of that kind were rejected by the inspector?—A. I could not say how many there were.

Q. Did you see more than that?-A. Yes, sir; I saw more than one.

Q. Did you see more than two?-A. Not sworn in according to the laws of Indiana, but men who were residents of the ward, and every one knew, would come in there with their affidavits made out in full and present it to the inspector; but they were men who had no real estate in the ward.

Q. And the challenges were not withdrawn, were they?-A. The challenges were not withdrawn.

Q. And the inspector would not receive that kind of affidavits, as the law required the affidavits to be of some one who owned real estate in the ward. Is not that the fact?-A. That is the law in this State.

Q. And it was that kind of affidavits you are referring to?-A. It is that kind of an affidavit.

Q. You say you have a personal knowledge of one man whose vote was refused after the affidavit had been made for him?-A. Two men that I know of.

Q. Was there more than two rejected after the affidavits had been made?-A. No; but there would be more men not coming to vote who had ascertained that they could not vote by being sworn in by some one who owned no real estate.

Q. As the law required?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Then you only know of two men whose votes were rejected when affidavits properly prepared had been offered?—A. No; I do not say that. I say that I know there was any amount of men who did not come up and apply, and did not go in the chute to vote because they knew their votes would be challenged and rejected.

Q. Give me the name of some man who did not vote and did not come to the chute

because he knew that he was going to be challenged.-A. I do not know the names of the parties.

Q. You do not know the name of one of them, do you?-A. I cannot call one to mind

now.

Q. All the votes that you say you saw rejected were two; is not that really so?—A. No. I saw men that I knew were voters in that ward, and I wanted them to come up and vote, and they replied if they went up there their votes would be challenged and the challengers would not withdraw them.

Q. Did you see the inspector reject any but two votes at that poll?-A. No rejection. Q. Did the inspector, Mr. Hetherington, reject more than two votes?-A. All Mr. Hetherington had to do was to wait for the outside man to challenge. He did not challenge any votes.

Q. Did he receive any vote of any one that was offered to him?-A. I do not know whether he did or not.

Q. I mean did he refuse any vote that was offered him?-A. Not that I know of. Q. Then, as a matter of fact, he received every vote that was tendered him by the voter ? A. Yes. But they could not get their votes into the hands of the inspector. Q. Did you see the inspector refuse to receive a vote of any man that was a voter in that ward?-A. Well, now, I do not know what you might call refusing. I saw Mr. Hetherington stand there and reluctantly take a ticket and look at it and see the thickness of it and wait for them to parley over it, and I saw him do that, and if he thought it was a Republican vote I am satisfied he would put that vote in without stopping a minute.

Q. Did you see the inspector, Mr. Hetherington, refuse to receive the vote of any man where a proper affidavit had been made?-A. Yes. I saw him refuse to-I do not know what you call proper affidavit. I saw him refuse to take the ballot of two or more after a citizen of the ward and a resident, and he knew him to be a resident, swore that this man was a legal voter.

Q. But the man who swore him in did not own any real estate in the precinct?—A. The man I allude to now did not own any real estate in the ward.

Q. And for that reason the vote was rejected?-A. Yes, sir; and the reason why this man made the affidavit that this man was a voter was because two men who did own real estate in the ward were scared out of swearing in any more votes for fear that they might get into trouble.

Q. Did they swear in any votes ?-A. They swore in one or two in the morning.

Q. What time did they leave there?-A. I think the first man we had there was this saloon-keeper.

Q. Chris. Schoettle?-A. Yes, sir; and he left there before noon.

Q. Did you see Senator McDonald there that day, or Mr. Frenzel?-A. I do not know Mr. Frenzel; I saw Senator McDonald come there.

Q. He was there about three or four o'clock in the afternoon?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Was Mr. Schoettle there at that time?-A. Yes, sir, he was there. He made up his mind, he said, to swear in a few more votes, and Mr. McDonald came down there to assure, as I understood at the time, Mr Schoettle that he would be all right in swearing in votes that he knew to be voters.

Q. That was about three o'clock in the afternoon ?-A. That was some time after din

ner.

Q. Did Mr. Schoettle try to swear in any man while Mr. McDonald was there ?-A. I think he did.

Q. He was intimidated in the morning and came back in the afternoon?-A. He said he knew him.

Q. You say he was intimidated in the morning, but came back in the afternoon and said he would swear in a few more votes?-A. I do not know wha the said about being intimidated in the morning. He did not say he was intimidated. He said he was not going to get into any racket to swear in a few votes.

Q. And did he not say that he was intimidated?--A. He called it a racket.

Q. And he came back there after he went away, to swear in a few more votes ?-A. He came back there with a fellow he knew to be a voter.

Q. I asked you if he did not go away and come back to swear in more votes?—A. I do not believe he did, sir, to the best of my knowledge.

Q. Did not he attempt it when Senator McDonald was there?-A. The fellows tried to get him to do it.

Q. Did not he come up in the chute with Senator McDonald with an affidavit to swear in some voter ?-A. Yes, sir, I believe he did; but I do not believe they got the vote in. Q. Mr. McDonald told him he would have to have some satisfactory evidence before he swore in a vote?-A. Yes, sir.

Q. Did not Mr. Schoettle go away after that?-A. Mr. Schoettle said, "I know this