dred (12,300) votes; Stanton J. Peelle received twelve thousand nine hundred and forty (12,940) votes; Robert W. Medkirk received three hundred and ninety (390) votes. In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the State of Indiana, at the city of Indianapolis, this 20th day of September, A. D. 1883. [SEAL.] (Indorsed :) Exhibit A to the deposition of W. R. Myers. DAVID TURPIE, being first duly sworn, testified as follows: W. R. MYERS, Direct examination by Mr. WILSON, attorney for Mr. English: Q. State your name, age, and residence.-A. My name is David Turpie; age, 53; residence, Indianapolis. Q. How long have you resided in Indiana?-A. Fifty-one years. Q. Have you held any official positions in this State; if so, what ?—A. I was a member of the commission on the revision of the laws. Q. Any other office ?-A. Well, yes; I was circuit judge. Q. Wasn't you United States Senator for a while?-A. Yes, if that is State office; and I was a member of the legislature several times and speaker of the house of representatives. Q. Were you in the city of Indianapolis at the time of the Congressional election, November 7, 1882, and did you attend the same?-A. I was in the city of Indianapolis at that time and attended the election. Q. Did you act in any official capacity at that election -A. I acted as one of the judges of that election at the second precinct of the 12th ward in this city. Q. Who were the candidates for Congress from this the seventh Congressional district on the Democratic, Republican, and National tickets at that election?—A. William E. English was the Democratic candidate, Stanton J. Peelle was the Republican candidate, and I do not recollect who the National candidate was. Q. Mr. Medkirk, was it not?-A. I do not know. Q. Did you see the Republican ticket voted for Stanton J. Peelle for Congress at that election in the city of Indianapolis ?-A. Yes, sir; I saw it as it was voted at our polls. Q. Did that Republican ticket have any distinguishing marks or embellishments except the names of the candidates and the offices for which they were voted ?—A. Yes, it had a distinguishing mark. Mr. PEELLE. I object to that. The WITNESS (continuing). The embellishment Mr. PEELLE. I object both to the question and the answer. Q. Describe what it was. Mr. PEELLE. To that I object. The ticket is the best evidence. A. It was a semicircular curve under the word "ticket," in the phrase "Republican ticket" at the head of the ticket, with two dots or dashes above it. Mr. WILSON. With reference to the objection made, I will say that we will offer that ticket in evidence before we get through. Q. Was this embellishment engraved ?—Å. I think it was engraved. Q. Did the material on which the ticket was printed designate it? Mr. PEELLE. I object to that. A. The material upon which the ticket was printed designated it from other tickets voted at that poll. Q. Was it plain white paper. Mr. PEELLE. I object to that as a mere matter of opinion, and incompetent. A. I think not. Q. When lightly folded would it remain folded, or spring open? (Objected to as incompetent.) A. It would not remain folded as ordinary white paper remains folded. Its tendency was to spring open. Q. If another ticket was folded inside this ticket, and, thus folded, said tickets were dropped into the ballot-box, would this ticket be likely to spring open and separate, so as to release the inclosed ticket and make two ballots ? (Objected to as incompetent.) A. Yes, there would be a likelihood of its doing so. Q. Could you, by sight, distinguish said ticket folded, with the name inside, from one printed on plain white paper?-A. Yes. Q. Could you distinguish it when folded, with the name inside, by touching it ?— A. Yes; perhaps more readily than by sight. Q. Did you ever know of such material to be used for tickets before at any election! (Objected to as immaterial and incompetent.) A. No: I never knew of such material being used before at any election. Q. Could you distinguish the Republican ticket voted for Stanton J. Peelle from the Democratic ticket voted at that election, both being folded with the names of the candidates inside ?-A. Yes; when the Republican ticket was printed upon the material which I have spoken of, I could distinguish it. The material was a substance somewhat resembling white paper, but it was thicker, heavier, denser, smoother, more elastic and springy than ordinary white paper, and therefore could be distinguished from it. Q. Could you distinguish said Republican ticket voted for Stanton J. Peelle from the National ticket voted at that election, both being folded with the names of the candidates inside? (Objected to as immaterial and incompetent.) A. Yes. There were very few National tickets voted at our poll. Such as I noticed were upon ordinary plain white paper. Q. Could you distinguish the Democratic ticket voted at that election from the National ticket, both tickets being folded with the names of the candidates inside ? (Objected to.) A. No; I could not distinguish the Democratic ticket from the National ticket. Q. Why not?-A. They were both printed on plain white paper. (Answer objected to as incompetent.) Q. Could you distinguish said Republican ticket voted for Stanton J. Peelle from any ticket of like length and width that was either plain white paper, writing paper, or book paper, said ticket being separately folded, as tickets usually are when voted! (Objected to as immaterial, incompetent, and irrelevant.) A. I think I could distinguish it from plain white paper very readily. Some book paper is not white paper, and some writing paper is not plain white paper, but I do not think this ticket was printed upon book paper, or writing paper, or plain white paper of any kind-the Republican ticket spoken of. Q. Could the inspector and other election officers tell by these tickets, when folded with the names of the candidates upon the inside, whether the person voting was voting a Republican ticket? (Objected to as immaterial and incompetent.) A. I speak for myself as one of the officers; I could distinguish it by handling it or by sight-if I looked at it or felt it—from any ticket, either National or Democratic, printed upon plain white paper. Q. Could persons looking on at the polls tell these Republican tickets when the voters handed them to the inspector, and the inspector placed them in the ballot-box, even when carefully folded, with the names of the candidates inside? (Objected to as immaterial and incompetent.) A. I think persons looking on with any care at the tickets as they were voted could have distinguished the Republican ticket at the polls where I was from any other ticket which was printed upon plain white paper. Q. How many Republican tickets of this character were voted for Peelle, if you know-A. The whole Republican vote at our ward—between five and six hundredwas voted upon tickets of this character, except, perhaps, in two or three instances in which the voters had especially prepared tickets printed upon plain white paper, by pasting or writing Republican names. (Question and answer objected to as incompetent, for the reason that the returns themselves are the best evidence of the number of votes cast) Cross-examination by STANTON J. PEELLE: Q. State how long you have resided in this city.-A. Since July, 1873. Q. State your politics.-A. I am a Democrat. Q. How long have you been a Democrat?-A. Ever since I have been a voter. Q. Were you ever connected with any newspaper establishment or paper house?— A. No, sir. Q. Are you a judge of the different qualities of paper, as an expert?-A. No, sir; I think not. Q. You never had any experience in handling or dealing in paper of various kinds! -A. I have never had any experience in dealing; I have handled a great deal of it. Q. What you have said with reference to paper is a mere matter of opinion with you?-A. No, I do not think it is; I think what I have said with reference to the difference between the material upon which the Republican ticket was printed, and upon which the Democratic and National tickets were printed, is not a matter of opinion, but a matter of fact. Q. You gave it as a matter of opinion when you spoke about the quality of paper, didn't you?-A. No, I do not give it as a matter of opinion when I say that this paper differed from ordinary white paper, and give the qualities in which it does differ; I did not give it as a matter of opinion that this paper was denser, thicker, heavier, more springy and more elastic than ordinary white paper. Q. When you used the words that it was not plain white paper, is not that a mere matter of opinion, not being an expert in the business?-A. No, sir; I do not think it is. Q. Then, what knowledge have you as a paper dealer or an expert in handling paper?-A. I have no knowledge as an expert; the only knowledge I testified to is that from observation, from sight and feeling. Q. You spoke about there being a semicircle at the head of this ticket?-A. No, sir; not at the head; it was under the word "ticket," in the phrase "Republican ticket" at the head of the ticket. Q. I will ask you if that circle you refer to is not a part of the letter "R!”—A. It was a semicircular curve. Not a semicircle. No, sir. It was not a part of the letter "R" or any other letter in the phrase "Republican Ticket." Q. You say a curve was on the ticket independent of the letter "R!”—A. Yes, sir; a semicircular curve, with two dashes above it. Q. And that, you say, is independent of the letter “R?”—A. Yes, sir. Q. I will ask you to look at this ticket (Mr. Peelle handed the witness a ticket) and state if that is the kind of a ticket you have reference to in your examination-inchief.-A. That is the kind of a ticket. I do not know whether it is identical with the ticket voted at the polls where I presided or not. It resembles it; the material upon which it is printed resembles it. Q. State if it is not the same kind of a heading that you have been describing on the tickets that were actually voted where you were an officer and judge.-A. Yes, sir; it resembles them. Q. If there is any difference between that ticket and the one voted at the polls, state what it is.-A. I could not say that unless I saw some of the tickets which were actually voted there. Q. You state that that curve you spoke of is not a part of the letter “R?”—A. I do most distinctly state that the curve on this ticket and the curve on the tickets voted at our polls were not part of the letter "R," or not connected with it, and no part of any other letter. Q. And that you say, notwithstanding you look at the head of this ticket?—A. Yes, sir. Q. Do you know of anybody at the second precinct, in the 12th ward, who voted at that election, who distinguished this from any other ticket voted ?—A. I know of one gentleman. That is myself. Q. Do you know of any other?-A. I do not know of any other. I have never heard of any other person speak of distinguishing or not distinguishing them. Q. You do not know of another one who voted at that precinct that distinguished this from any other ticket?-A. I do not know of any one who spoke of distinguishing it. There may have been three hundred who distinguished it. There were about three hundred Democratic voters in the precinct. I do not know of any one who spoke of distinguishing it. Q. State, if you know, of any one having voted one of these tickets at that precinct who had tickets folded and inclosed within the ticket.-A. No, sir. Q. I will ask you to state, if you know, any one who was misled in voting in consequence of the ticket that was voted for Mr. Peelle at that precinct.-A. No; I do not know of any one who was misled. Q. State if you know of any one who objected to this ticket for any reason as destroying the secrecy of the ballot at that precinct.-A. No. I could not give the name of any one who did so. I have heard a good deal of comment upon the ticket by outsiders on the election day, and a great deal afterwards as to its character-comment in the way of objections. Q. You know of no one who objected to it as destroying the secrecy of the ballot-A. No. I do not recollect any one having objected to it on the election day. Afterwards it was objected to very much, and some of the objectors put it upon that ground. Q. State if you know of any one who voted this ticket that would have voted differently had it been printed on the same kind of paper that the Democratic ticket was printed on.-A. No; I do not know that I do. I do not think of any one now. Re-examination by Mr. WILSON: Q. During the day of the election, and during the hours that the voting was going on, where were you?-A. I was in a small room at the engine-house, in which votes were received through an open window. Q. You were acting as one of the judges?-A. Yes, sir. Q. And in that room?-A. Yes, sir. I was a member of the election board, and staid in that room all the time. There was no adjournment from the time the polls opened until they were closed. Recross-examination by Mr. PEELLE: Q. State whether or not during that day any one complained to the board about the character of the ticket voted for Mr. Peelle.-A. No one complained to the board about the character of the ticket. Q. How many Democrats did you say voted that day-about how many?—A. I should think between two and three hundred; very nearly three hundred. DAVID TURPIE. ROBERT W. MEDKIRK, being first duly sworn, testified as follows: Direct examination by Mr. WILSON, attorney for Mr. English: Q. State your name, age, and residence.-A. Robert W. Medkirk; age, 38; residence, Indianapolis. Q. How long have you resided in Indiana?-A. About sixteen years. Q. Were you in the city of Indianapolis at the time of the Congressional election, November 7, 1882, and did you attend the same ?-A. Yes, sir; I was here, and at tended. Q. Who were the candidates for Congress from this seventh Congressional district on the Democratic, Republican, and National tickets at that election?-A. Stanton J. Peelle upon the Republican ticket, William E. English upon the Democratic ticket, and myself on the National ticket. Q. Did you see the Republican ticket voted for Stanton J. Peelle for Congress at that election in the city of Indianapolis?-A. I did; at some of the precincts. Q. Did that Republican ticket have any distinguishing marks or other embellishments except the names of the candidates and the offices for which they were voted (Objected to as immaterial and incompetent.) Mr. WILSON. In connection with the objection, and before the answer is made, we say that we will introduce the ticket referred to. A. Yes, sir; I think it had. Q. Describe what it was.-A. Well, the ticket voted in the precinct that I live in, the second ward, was printed on heavy paper. Q. I ask you as to distinguishing marks on the inside of the ticket ?-A. My recollection now of the distinguishing mark in that, was a scroll surrounding the words Republican ticket" at the head of the ticket. Q. Do you know whether this embellishment that you refer to was engraved ?—A. No, sir; I could not say. Q. Did the material on which the ticket was printed designate it?-A. Yes, sir. Q. Was it plain white paper? (Objected to.) A. No, sir; it was a heavy paper, rather in the nature of card-board, and it was not plain white. Q. When lightly folded would it remain folded, or spring open?-A. When folded as it ordinarily was in voting it would, after it was dropped out of the hand, spring apart. Q. If another ticket was folded inside this ticket, and, thus folded, said tickets were dropped into the ballot-box, would this ticket be likely to spring open and separate so as to release the inclosed ticket? (Objected to as immaterial and incompetent.) A. Yes, sir, it would. Q. Could you, by sight, distinguish this ticket folded with the names inside from one printed on plain white paper? (Objected to as immaterial and incompetent, assuming that it was not printed on plain white paper.) A. Yes, sir. Q. Could you distinguish it, when folded with the names inside, by touching it?— A. Yes, sir; I could. I am speaking now of my precinct, in my ward. Q. Did you ever know such material to be used before for tickets? (Objected to as immaterial and incompetent.) A. I never saw election tickets printed on paper of that material before. Q. Could you distinguish said Republican ticket, voted for Stanton J. Peelle, from the Democratic ticket voted at that election, both being folded with the names of the candidates inside? (Objected to as immaterial and incompetent.) A. Yes, sir. Q. Could you distinguish said Republican ticket, voted for Stanton J. Peelle, from the National ticket voted at that election, both being folded with the names of the candidates inside? (Objected to as immaterial and incompetent.) Mr. WILSON. We propose to introduce hereafter the Democratic and National tickets. A. Yes, sir. Q. How?-A. Well, the National and Democratic tickets were both printed on plain white paper-on paper that was ordinarily used at elections, and that I have been accustomed to see. There was no difference between them at all; that is, if they were folded up with the names of the candidates inside, and the party to which the candidates belonged. After they were folded I could not tell any difference be tween the National ticket and the Democratic ticket, but as between the Republican tickets and those tickets I could, from the fact, as I have stated, that the Republican ticket was printed on heavy paper, that was called card-board-that seemed to be the name that was used for it-and its color was not, to my eye, plain white; and, from the general character of it, I could distinguish the tickets very readily; that is, after seeing one of each party. Q. Could you distinguish the Republican ticket voted for Stanton J. Peelle from any ticket of like length and width that was either plain white paper, writing paper, or book paper, said ticket being separately folded, as tickets usually are when voted! (Objected to as immaterial and incompetent.) A. Well, I think I could. Q. Could the inspector or any other election officer tell by these tickets, when folded with the name of the candidate on the inside, whether or not the person voting it was voting the Republican ticket? (Objected to as incompetent and irrelevant for the reason that he cannot tell what the election board would do under such circumstances.) A. Well, sir; from the tickets that were voted at my precinct in the second ward, the inspector or judges could tell by handling or seeing the ticket very readily the Republican tickets voted there from the other tickets. Q. You mean handling and seeing, or haudling or seeing ?-A. Handling and seeing both. Q. Could persons looking on at the polls tell these Republican tickets when the voters handed them to the inspector and the inspector placed them in the ballot-box, even when carefully folded with the names of the candidates inside? (Objected to as incompetent and immaterial.) A. Yes, sir. Q. How many Republican tickets of this character were voted for Peelle, if you know?-A. I do not know. Q. Do you know how many were voted at your precinct?-A. No, sir. Q. Were most of the tickets voted at your precinct Democratic or Republican tickets?-A. Mostly Republican. Q. Quite a large majority Republicans?-A. Yes, sir. Q. Were the Republican tickets voted there of the character you have described? (Objected to.) A. Oh, yes, sir; the tickets that I have described were the tickets that were voted there by Republicans at that election. Cross-examination by Mr. PEELLE: Q. Did you see any of them voted?-A. Yes, sir. Q. Did you see any of them after they were voted ?-A. After they were in the box! Q. Yes, sir.-A. No, sir. Q. Then you do not know the kind of tickets that were in the box-A. Yes, sir; I know the kind pretty well that were in the box. Q. You did not see them, though?-A. I could not say. I expect that I saw some, probably; well, no, I would not say that I saw them actually go in the box-dropped in. I saw them put in the hands of the inspector. Q. You know they were the same kind of tickets you have described ?—A. Yes, sir. Q. You give this, then, as your opinion simply as to the quality of the paper, not knowing as an expert?-A. Well, I could not say that it was an opinion, because it was my judgment upon seeing and handling the papers. Q. What is the difference between your judgment and opinion of the matter?—A. I might not be an expert in the matter, and still have a judgment upon the color and character of the ticket, and might not be able to tell what it was made of. Q. Is not all that you know about it simply that it was on a little heavier paper than the Democratic and National tickets were printed on ?-A. No, sir; that is not all. Q. What else do you know?-A. In the first place when I went to the polls that morning, I had not been there five minutes Q. I am asking if it is not the fact that all you know about it is, that the ticket was a little heavier than the other?-A. If I understand your question, I think I was answering it right. Q. Is it not a fact that that is the only difference that you are able to discern, not being an expert, simply that it was on heavier paper?-A. No; that is not the only way. Q. What other difference about the ticket was there?-A. I say, under your ques |