required of them, assumed that the constitution invested them with judicial functions, making them "judges of elections,' and then proceeded to the most flagrant and outrageous abuse of this wrongfully assumed power in order to defeat the will of the people as emphatically expressed at the polls. The declaration that 8 Senators and 29 Representatives do not "appear to be elected"-Every one of these a Republican -No Democrat or Greenbacker under ban-Frivolous pretexts by which large cities were denied representation. see who " presentatives were summoned to take seats belonging to their Republican opponents show still more flagrant frauds, perpetrated while the returns were in the custody of the governor and council. For instance, in York county, constituting the first senatorial district, two fraudulent alterations of the same character were made to have different effects, though both subserved the same purpose-that of seating men who obtained the fewest votes at the polls. The return from Berwick, when sent to the Secretary of State, gave to George H. Wakefield, a Republican nominee for senator, 258 votes. In Dayton, a strongly Democratic town, Josiah Their duty is to examine the returns and H. Stover was returned as receiving 96 votes. appear to be elected," according to each case was converted into an A by closing After these returns reached Augusta, the H in those returns, and then to summon such per- at the top, so as (under the ruling of the govsons. They declared the condition of these returns to be such that eight senators and ernor and council) to deprive Geo. H. Waketwenty-nine representatives, who, in fact, re- to give to Josiah A. Stover, Democratic fusionfield, Republican, of the vote of Berwick, and ceived the requisite number of votes to elect them, did not "appear to be elected." ist, the vote of Dayton; thereby depriving the Every one of these senators and representatives Oliver P. Bragdon was the Republican candiformer of his seat in the Senate. Again, was a Republican; not a single Democrat or date for representative in the district comGreenbacker failed to receive a summons by reason of any defect in the returns; and thus posed of Gouldsboro' and several other towns those who were in a minority at the polls the votes cast therein. In Gouldsboro' he rein Hancock county and received a majority of were to be made a majority in each branch of ceived 207 against 125 cast for James Flye, the Legislature. By rejecting returns for Greenbacker. After the returns came into the frivolous alleged informalities and technical hands of the governor and council, some one inaccuracies, eight Republican senators were to give place to eight fusion senators, and changed the P into a B, by adding a loop, and twenty-nine Republican representatives were thereupon these 207 votes were counted for a refused their seats, to which seventeen fusion-suppositious Oliver B. Bragdon, instead of for ists were admitted, and twelve were left his summons, which was sent to his opponent, the proper man, and he was thus deprived of vacant. Those twelve represented the cities of Portland, Saco, Lewiston, Bath, and Rock-Flye, upon the ground that he had more votes than either Oliver P. Bragdon or Oliver B. land. The average Republican majority in Portland was 629. Of the whole number of ing the Republican vote to have been divided Bragdon--wrongfully and fraudulently assuming. If all of these were counted for the between two Bragdons, when there was but highest candidate on the fusion ticket, he one. Skowhegan cast 595 Republican to 302 would have been still several hundred behind the lowest upon the Republican ticket. Yet, because the name of every man who received even a single vote was not written in full upon the returns, the Governor and council, acting under the obligation of official duty, and the sanction of an official oath, declare that it does not "appear" by such a return that anybody was chosen to represent Portland in the Legislature, and her five representatives, having an average majority of 629, are excluded. Upon pretexts equally frivolous the four cities of Bath, Saco, Lewiston and Rockland, having seven representatives, were disfranchised, the Governor refusing even to order a new election; thus denying to these principal cities in the State any voice in a Legislature which was to establish a valuThe foregoing are merely given as samples ation as a basis of taxation for the next de- of the whole. There were very many other cade. It was the most odious form of taxa-instances of similar changes and frauds, made tion without representation. votes cast 143 were returned as 66 scatter Fraudulent counting in of Fusionists who fusion votes; yet the representative so chosen In all the 37 cases, no instance of ambi guity in the returns-All “ to appeared be elected-Only 15 cases of doubt in 60 years-Favors to the Fusionists-Different sauces for goose and gander. and committed to keep out Republicans who were elected, and to seat fusionists who were not. There was not one solitary instance out of the thirty-seven in which there was any ambiguity in the returns, or in which it did not plainly thereby " appear" who was elected. In the sixty years of the history of The cases in which fusion senators and re- that State but fifteen such instances of fatal had the smallest votes-Fraudulent reasoning conclusive to fraud-loving minds -Specimens coming under the Governor's remarkable ruling. defects have occurred-15 out of more than 10,000 persons elected to the Legislatures convened within that time; yet Governor Garcelon's astuteness, aided by the wisdom of his council, discovered 37 among the 182 persons making up the Legislature of 1880. Every error counting out a Republican, and 25 of them also counting in a fusionist. No error could affect a fusionist, because new blanks were surreptitiously sent out from the capitol to several towns electing fusion representatives, that they might be correctly filled according to the new strict requirements of the governor and council, and were substituted for the original ones, which contained errors similar to those held fatal to Republican success. In other cases errors fatal to a Republican were held not to prejudice a fusionist. Had the law, as previously and correctly administered, been observed, the Republicans would have had a majority in each branch, and had the technical rules wrongfully established by Governor Garcelon been faithfully and impartially applied to both parties, the Republicans would still have had a majority; but they were only enforced to exclude Republicans and were disregarded to seat fusionists. Intense indignation throughout the State -Garcelon calls to his aid convicts and jail birds-He abstracts $4,000 from the special fund for free high schools, with which to pay them. Naturally, this course created intense excitement and indignation throughout the State. At first, Governor Garcelon was disposed to disregard it, and summoned to his support an illegal body of men, among whom were convicts and jail birds (one of them having been recently pardoned out of States' prison by Governor Garcelon himself), whom he paid by a misappropriation of the public funds. To make his conduct harmoniously infamous throughout, the governor took $4,000 from the free high school fund to pay these men; being the fund of all others that should not have been touched, not only on account of the importance of the purpose to which it was devoted, but because it is a special fund raised and pledged to aid towns in the maintenance of such schools. The storm still rising-Garcelon quails at last-Refers the case to the Supreme Court-It unanimously declares him utterly wrong in all respects-Sudden collapse of the whole damnable conspiracy. At last, however, the governor quailed before the rising storm, and consented to ask the opinion of the Supreme Court in a method authorized by the Constitution upon the legality of his conduct. The unanimous reply of this tribunal, in which both parties were represented, was that he had been utterly wrong from the beginning and in every particular; that the senators and representatives were not dependent upon the governor and council for their seats, but upon the suffrages of their fellow-citizens; and that if they received no notice or "summons (which is merely a notification and not a judgment) to attend the convening of the Legislature they could convene without one. Thereupon the whole fusion conspiracy collapsed for want of popular support and not from any acquiescence on the part of the fusion leaders in the supremacy of the law. The Legislature, as chosen by the people, went on and performed its appropriate functions, first choosing Daniel F. Davis (Republican), governor. PART IX. The Infamous New York Election Frauds–Supervisor John I. Davenport's Startling Revelations on the Stand — For Twelve Years the Tammany Democracy has Voted Thousands of Men who Never Lived! -64,000 Votes Fraudulently added, in 1868, to the Lawful Votes of New York, New Jersey, and Connecticut- "Whole Streets Taken and Naturalized from House to House!"—The Various Systems in Operation, Following is from the sworn testimony of Supervisor John I. Davenport, given before the Wallace Senate Investigating Committee, July 16, 17, 19, and 20, 1880, in New York city, after which the testimony was abruptly terminated because, as Senator McDonald (Democrat) said: "the chairman (Senator Wallace) was unwilling to have the investigation go on. The Democratic members of the committee had evidently had enough of it. It is a most interesting bit of history. Who John I. Davenport is, and what he has been attending to these many years-How he commenced work. Said the witness, Mr. Davenport (July 16, 1880): "I am a United States Commissioner, and Supervi sor of Elections. In 1876 I issued a number of warrants for the arrest of persons using fraudulent naturalization sel for the Union League Club to investigate the papers. In 1868 I was employed as counfrauds that had been and were still going on, and to prepare proof and to secure witnesses. I sifted the mass of evidence obtained, and laid it before the committee, known as the Lawrence Committee, and following that came their report. At the first election after I was appointed Chief Supervisor I gave notice to all persons having naturalization papers issued in 1868 to be careful in their use, and proceeded to accumulate additional evidence to reach those who had committed the frauds. I found that there were persons who acted as witnesses for hundreds and thousands of people, and I accumulated information relative to the conduct of naturalization proceedings in that year, and in 1866 and 1867 also. How these wholesale frauds began-60,000 "In 1858 the Court of Common Pleas was neglected, and only issued 3,145 certificates, while the Superior Court issued 20,000, and the Supreme Court, for the first time in its history, was opened for purposes of naturalization. In the Superior Court there were issued in December, 1868, 26,226; in January, 1869, the deputy clerk of the court issued 27,897. In October alone 18,472 certificates were given out. "In the Superior Court, before one judge, there were issued in fifteen days of October, 1868, according to the files of the court, 18,817 certificates. There was, as nearly as can be ascertained, an additional issue of 20,000 in the two courts, of which no records appear on the books. In 1868 there were 64,000 such naturalization papers manufactured in these courts, Dirty work in the Supreme Court-8,754 more naturalization papers issued than the Court files show. [Mr. Davenport here read a copy of the circular. Its purport was to render the persons referred to suspicious of the Government's supervisors, and seemed especially to warn them against appearing before Mr. Davenport. An early call at their office was advised]. "I proceeded during the Summer with the business, and between 2,000 and 3,000 persons appeared before me, surrendered their false papers, and made affidavits as to how they obtained them. Of these 1,000 men had voted on the papers for eight years. They were considerably over age when they arrived in this country-from forty to sixty years of age-yet they were naturalized as minors, without declaring their intentions. In 1878 the number of fraudulent certificates registered was reduced to 3,197, as against 10,000 in 1876. I issued warrants for 3,100 holders of these papers, and prevented all except 1,240 from voting, and in these cases it was not my fault. Some of the 3,197 procured new papers.' "In sifting this matter I learned first that the number of applications on file nowhere nearly approached the number issued in 1868. Certificates in blank were issued, under the seal of the Court, and with the clerk's signature attached; and in 1867 the same thing was done. [Mr. Davenport here showed a certificate.] Where they were so issued, he continued, they were ready to use by filling in the names. I have in my possession blanks with one name erased by a knife, and another filled in. Later this kind of work was done with acid, and is almost impossible to detect. This practice was carried on to a considerable extent. I also learned that many certificates were issued in names of fictitious persons for whom applications were made out and filed in the court. Many of them were signed, in good handwriting, by witnesses who cannot write at the present time." Professional false witnesses. "Many of the persons engaged in this work were acting as standing professional witnesses. For instance: Patrick Goff was a witness for 2,162 persons, and John Moran for 1,397. Ten persons were witnesses for 8,245 applicants. In one month, as shown by the files of the Court, these witnesses, about 100 in number, made affidavits for above 20,000 people. They were, in fact permanently attached to the Courts during the naturalization proceedings, in that capacity, and for that purpose. For October, 1868, there were 37,000 applications, to which they made affidavit. They acted in both Courts on the same day. "In the Supreme Court, before Judge Barnard, there were 18,824. In the Superior Court, during October, five judges took part in the proceedings. Judge Barber naturalized 75; Anthony M. Robinson, the same number; Samuel Jones, 1,000. From seven to eighttenths of the number were before Judge McCunn, and Judge Garvin had the remainder. All except Judges Garvin and McCunn attended to their ordinary duties during the month, and Garvin did so part of the time, doing chamber business occasionally. This total of 18,824 in the Supreme Court, is 8,754 more than appears on the files of the court for 1869, as I learn from testimony other than that given by M. Plum. Davenport begins the fight-His offer to Tammany-Results of his good work. "In 1872 and 1874 instructions were given to regard those specific cases where information was obtained relative to fraudulent naturalization papers. In 1876, I issued a notice to the supervisors to challenge peremptorily every person who appeared for the purpose of registering on the 1868 certificate. I had obtained so much information that it was my desire to give each person notice that his right to the possession of such certificate would be contested, and to place him on his guard as to their use. By 1878, I had obtained additional facts, as I desired to sustain myself, but not to act hastily. I believed that a large number of those holding such certificates had been imposed upon. I sought Mr. Kelly and proposed to him the appointment of a joint committee of Republicans and Democrats, and said that if they would work with me I would sit during the evening, in order to allow the laboring men more facilities for appearing than they would have during the daytime. And I proposed that the committee from Tammany Hall should aid me in having the holders of '68 papers appear before me in the Spring and Sum-davits for 273 persons, and in the Supreme Court for mer of 1878; that these fraudulent papers should be taken up, and the holders be permitted to declare their intentions where they had not declared them; and that those who had declared their intentions should obtain proper papers. Thus I wanted to save the issuing of warrants, and to prevent arrests and the complications which would arise if such action was taken at the election. "Henry L. Clinton, of Tammany Hall, wrote to me, and subsequently a committee was appointed by Mr. Kelly's organization, namely, Luke Cozzens, Judge Quin, and Henry D. Purroy. They appointed one of their number to sit in my office during the proceedings. They sat for two or three days and then withdrew, for reasons unknown to me, although I have my views. They opened an office in Reade street, and sent out circulars printed in English and German, to all holders of papers of 1868. "Patrick Goff was witness in the Supreme Court as follows: On October 9th, for 63; 10th, 325; 12th,391; 13th, 357; 14th, 114; 15th, 196; 16th, 165; 17th, 13; 19th, 72; 20th, 56; 21st, 20; 22d, 18. "John Moran was witness as follows: October 7th, for 9; 8th, 34; 9th, 6; 10th, 29; 12th, 95; 13th, 136; 14th, 115; 15th, 30; 16th, 265; 17th, 1; 19th, 60; 20th, 51; 21st, 98; 22d, 61; 23d, 71. "John Ward appeared for applicants as follows: In the Supreme Court, October 8th, 44; 9th, 40; 10th, 17; 12th, 136; 13th, 162; 14th, 52; 15th, 107; 16th, 29; 17th, 23; 19th, 63; 20th, 58; 21st, 46; 22d, 39; 23d, 44; and in the Superior Court, October 1st, 8; 2d, 22; 3d, 32; 5th, 17; 6th, 26; 7th, 27; 8th, 33; 9th, 15; 10th, 7; 12th, 10; 14th, 7; 15th, 4; 16th, 2; 17th, 3; 19th, 11; 20th, 2. "Patrick McCaffery in the Superior Court made affi. 676. John Ward appeared for a total of 1,069 applicants. In these applications the signatures of the applicants were not there, but their names were used. The witnesses obtained the certificates in the names of the applicants, and sold the papers to them at rates varying from 50 cents to $2." Spreading the work to other counties. "In the Supreme Court, Goff, in one day, obtained certificates for 1,000 persous, and took to Kings County 400. Numbers were also delivered to nearly all the river counties-Westchester, Putnam, Orange, Rockland. I know of 500 that were offered in Saratoga County, in blank, to Mr. Curtis of the State Committee * * * I believe that a very large at $1 apiece. number of certificates were issued for which there are no records and no application on file any where in court. I call the attention of the committee to the testimony before the Congressional Committee on Contested Seats in the case of Van Wyck against Green, and that from Orange and other counties before the Law rence Committee, and to a letter written by me to County Clerk Gumbleton on October 22, 1878, asking him if any naturalizations had been made by the Supreme Court in 1866, and to Mr. Gumbleton's reply in the negative. Certificates were printed for the Supreme Court until 1868." Not informed on history—“Standing witnesses" under criminal indictment ! "Here is a certificate in which the person who filled up the blank forgot that 1872 was not the ninety-first year of the independence of the United States, and filled up the blank as he had been accustomed to do in 1868, instead of making it the ninety-sixth year of independence. In a certificat issued to James Phelan and in two others the 6' is erased and '8' written over it. The name of Max Weinheim was not on the '66 certificate, as none were presented to the Superior Court in that year, so the Court sent another paper to his house [tossing the certificate to Senator McDonald]. I also believe that naturalization papers were given out in blanks, because I have in my possession several papers for which there is no application on file. The clerks so informed me, and I have also inspected the records. "Many persons whom I questioned said they got their papers at the City Hall, and this was undoubtedly true. But the Court only sat two nights at that place; the papers were given out from the clerk's office. The room in the basement was occupied in October, 1868, by a large number of men sent from the different wards of the city, as standing witnesses, and the applications were filled up by them. Out of 39,000 certificates printed for the Supreme Court, only 1,862 were left when they got through, as Mr. Lowe testified upon the Lawrence Committee, and none was issued except by the clerk. From certain facts obtained I learned that certificates of naturalization were obtained at club-rooms and bar-rooms. Very many of the professional witnesses were under five or six indictments each on criminal charges, and both McCunn and Barnard, who had long been criminal judges, knew the men personally. In 1868 United States Marshal Murray, believing this work was being done, sent a number of fictitious names to the Democratic National Committee and in a few hours obtained certificates of naturalization for all, on the payment of $2.00 each. Applications were made out at Democratic headquarters, and residences were given in stone-yards and vacant lots." Making citizens for New Jersey, and Connecticut also-Whole streets naturalized from house to house-Various systems. "Nor did the Courts confine their naturalization to this and adjoining counti3; they naturalized many persons from New Jersey and ther States. I know of the seizure of 3,000 certificates, contracted for regularly to be delivered in Connecticut, at 50 cents each. They were seized in a liquor store at Prince and Mercer streets by the police. naturalized in the Supreme Court. In Greenwich, James, Spring, Thames, and other streets, numbers were given in excess of the houses, and Patrick Goff, as a witness for these, gave his address in thirteen different places-all No. 44.' "Another system adopted was for two aliens to appear for each other, although the statute requires that a witness must be a citizen of the United States. Some of the standing witnesses who had appeared during the month turned up on the last day, and were themselves duly naturalized. "[In reply to Senator McDonald's question, Mr. Davenport stated that he knew of this fact, of applicants appearing for each other, by the indices of the Courts. These indices, he said until after arrests were made, in 1868, were simply alphabetical lists, made up months afterward, and no pretence was made that they were anything else; as, for instance, in the Su reme Court, on February 19, 1871, the clerk had just begun to make up the indices for 1868. There was no record of these naturalization proceedings, except in these indices.]" Papers issued to those who had not even declared their intentions-The witnesses sworn in droves of 100 to 150!-Papers sent through by mail to non-applicants! I find that many persons who held certificates of naturalization which were granted upon these applications have not, in fact, declared their intentions, and have not sworn to these applications which appeared upon the file of the Court. Others were not asked whether they had done so or not, or in regard to their age. Others came here over the age of eighteen who had declared their intentions, but yet were made to appear on file as if they had not done so. Others had made previous declarations, yet the originals which, if they had been properly naturalized, would have been returned to the Court and attached to their applications, were still in their possession. I know as a fact, from observation, that in 1868, when these witnesses to the naturalization papers were sworn, they were sworn in large companies, frequently from 100 to 150 at a time, the Bible being held in the hands of the clerk and the witnesses holding up their hands, and being sworn, as I stated yesterday, to the number of the affidavits by them signed. With regard to the professional interests, they really signed no affidavits, and therefore did not have any hesitation in taking such an oath. I also learned that papers were sent to people through the Post Office without any application on their part. ་ Lists of 18,824 and of 18,653 Naturalizations in two courts within twenty-three days! One Judge makes 2,543 Citizens in one day! The Supreme Court sits ordinarily about four hours a day. Upon two or three occasions it sat for a period of from five to six hours. The actual number purporting to be naturalized, so far as any applications now on file show in the Supreme Court, and so far as can be seen from the index in the Superior Court, is as follows: 1868. October 2.. October 3. "[Mr. Davenport hero gave the names of two persons October 1... from New Jersey naturalized in New York, Peter E. Krankle, of Hoboken, and George Hooten. The latter was naturalized on a declaration form to which no declaration is attached, but which contains this peremptory order: "Give this man his certificate. *** JOHN H. McCUNN.'"] October 4.. October 5.. Supreme Court. Superior Court. 429 746 894 1,388 October 6.. October 7.. In October 13. October 15. October 16. October 17. "According to the ratio in the Courts since 1868, from 40 to 50 per cent. of the persons naturalized should have been on previous declarations of intention. In 1868, out of 18,824 on file, only 400 were on declaration. the Supreme Court the ratio should be the same. of 25,000 only 4,000 were on declaration and discharges. In the Court of Common Pleas a large number was on declaration, made within two years. Whole streets were taken and naturalized from house to house. From one disreputable place in Green Street, forty-two persons were registered. The numbers ran as high as 348 on the register when there were but 263 in the street. In City Hall Place men were registered as high as No. 342 when there were only forty houses there. Out of forty-four houses in Vandewater street 103 men were October 19. October 20. October 21.. October 22 October 23. Total... This makes a total of 37,477 attempted naturaliza- | the Court adjourned, and not a line appeared on the tions in the two courts in the month of October. On minutes in regard to the other 18,818 persons. Mr. October 12 it will be seen that 2,543 naturalization pa- Davenport was interrupted in his legal quotations to pers were granted in the Supreme Court by one man- show that a Court record was necessary by Senator Judge Barnard. On the same day in the Superior McDonald. He replied that he was simply stating the Court, according to the index of the office, 2,077 were authority under which he acted. Senator McDonald granted, making 4,620 for the day. did not see any need for it, and complained that he could not tell when the witness was reading and when he was commenting. Testimony of experienced judges that 8 or 10 persons only can be naturalized in one hour-Judge McCunn naturalizes 2 in one minute, and Judge Barnard 2,543 in 5 hours! I call your attention to the testimony of Nathaniel Jarvis, of the Court of Common Pleas, in the year 1868. On one occasion he was in the Superior curt hen naturalization was going on, and he testifies that the applicants were rot allowed to be present. Also to the testi. ny of John R. Brady, of the Cour of Common Pleas, before the Lawrence Committee, n which he expresses an opinion that men could be naturalized properly at the rate of onc every five minutes. Also to the report of the Committee the judiciary of the United States Senate made on nuary and March 9, 1845, with testimony concerning viclations naturalization laws contained in the same volume. The Judiciary Committee was empowered by the Sen te to takc testimony in th cities of Padelphia, New Orleans and New Y rk with reference violations of the naturalization laws. Th Commissioner who took testimony in this is w Hamilton, John Lloyd and Alexander W. Tradford. Ther brough before them all the judges of the Superior Court wh had been engaged in naturalization, together with the judges of the Marine Court, which at this time naturalized foreigners. Judge Hamilton, of the Marine Court, testified that "the greatest number of naturalizations I ever found myself le to administe in a session of eight hours was, think, eighty." All the judges, with one single exception, testified tha eight or ten an hour was all they could possibly naturalize. Judge McCunn has since testified that he naturalized two a minute, but Judge Barnard must have naturalized even more rapidly, as on October 12 he natural ized 2,543 in five hours. Jol Many applicants born in the United States -Prominent citizens signing as witnesses with a "mark" who did not appear at all-Other illegalities. It is well that I should call attention to the fact that those fraudulently naturalized in 1868 were made to appear as minors on the files of the Court. also found that a grea number of the applicants were born in the United States, and even in this city. I also find, Mr. Davenport continued, he names of prominent citizens a witnesses, who never appeared in court and who were not witnesses, and most of whose signatures were made with a mark. Among them are August Belmont, J.T. Hoffman, William M. Tweed, Peter B. Sweeney, Joan J. Bradley Alderman Seery, Coroner Woltman, J. S. McGowan, William H. Vanderbilt, Samuel G. Courtney, then United States District Attorney, engaged in prosecuting the frauds at that time, and numerous others. [Mr. Davenport then quoted legal authorities and precedents to show that two itizens were required as witnesses for naturalization, until the issue of the Revised Statutes, wherein it was declared that on witness was sufficient. He also drew attention to the fact that in many cases of naturalization in 1868 there was no renunciation of allegiance to other authority.] Commissioner Davenport draws attention to many other gross informalities. Mr. Davenport proceeded to show, by a decision of Judge Pratt, that the testimony showing five years' residence must be taken in open Court by an oral examination of the witness, previously rrepared affidavits not being in evidence. In these cases in 1868 no record was taken by the Court. On the minutes of the Supreme Court six names appeared during the month of October up to October 6. On the next day Senator Blair-I can tell. Mr. Davenport, pray proceel. Mr. Davenport quoted several authorities showing the necessity of Court decisions being recorded in naturalization cases, and said in the Superior Court in this city the record were kept in 1814 and down to 1858, out when the naturalizations began on a large scale the clerks abandoned the custom because it was a little trouble; and not until 1872 or 187 did they resume the practice of recording the minutes of the Court. udge Blatchford, although expressing the opinion that where the applications were upon the files, nd it had beer. he custom of the Court to treat these files as records, they should be treated as records, yet admitted that s ch records might be impeached. Senator McDonald-Who are ou swearing by now? Mr. Davenport-i am speaking of Judge Blatchford. A short discussion ensued, in the course of which Senator Hoar said. If it be true that there were some 6 0 of these naturalization papers that were void and bogus all through, that they were obtained a mere sham, it is not necessary, perhaps, in this distance oftime, to consider if there was a mistake as to the quality or charac ter of the record. I do not think it necessary to spend so much time on this point. Mr. Davenport has given his reasons. His opinion or action upon the illegal papers of 1868-He will act in the Presidential Election of 1889 as he did in 1878. lowed to proceed with his citation of authorities, but This little having ended, Mr. Davenport was alin a short ime Senator Biar interrupted ith a question as to his opinion of the naturalization papers of 1868, in regard to which warrants had been issued. Mr. Davenport-I believed the that they were fraudulent and void, and I sti believe th same, Senator Blair-Are there any of those papers still outstanding' Presidential election I intend pursuing the same course Mr. Davenport-There are, and during the coming in regard to them as I did in 1878. The holde oi them have received the fullest kind of notice, and I do not believe there is any voter on an 1868 paper who does ot believe that the validity of th paper i auestioned. Their validity was first questioned in 168, and the holders have been frequently warned since by publication in the papers, by official -otification, by challenges, by personal notices to the holders, and by the various investigations which have followed my actions. The number naturalized in each year from 1856 to 1876 inclusive, and since. No. Naturalized. from the year 1856 to 1876, as follows: I have here some facts in regard to naturalization Year. No. natur- Year. No. Natur- Year. alized. alized. 1856.... 16,516 1863.... 2,641 1857. 8,998 1864....12,202 185. 6,975 1865.... 7,239 159.... 7,649 1860. 3,56^ 186 1870. 4,074 1871. 3,528 1872. 9,965 .13, 40 1873. 4,197 1867....15,486 1874. 4,752 1862.... 7.C42 275.. 4,907 1869.... 3, 7 1861.... 13, 58 1862.... ,417 Ther have been about ,000 since, added Mr. Davenport. Cenat Blair-Have you any statistics showing the ratio of ign population and increase o naturalized citizens Mr. Davenport-Ive the emigration statistics from 1847 to 1876, but there is nothing to indicate what became of he immigrants. Senator Clair-Ho you read the testimony of Mr. Boese, the Clerk of the Superior Court, and have you any statement to make in regard to it? |