1874.] OF THE HOUSE OF DELEGATES. 835

duct from either party and give them to his opponent,
any votes legal in themselves he may have received, but
which were obtained illegally by the one when intended for
the other. But before one single vote can be deducted, three
things must be clearly shown: First. That it was illegal.
Second. That such a vote was cast. Third. That it was cast
for the party from whom the deduction is sought to be made.
A vote cannot be deducted except upon the ground that the
party has received it when he had no right to do so. The
first thing, therefore, and absolutely essential to the lawful-
ness of the proceeding, before a vote is deducted from the
count of any party, is to show clearly he received it, or else
the double wrong may iollow, of taking from one what he
has not received, whilst at the same time the illegal vote may
in fact be counted by the other party. Tried by this test,
was the deduction of these six votes from Widdicombe, and
the giving them to Brooke, legal and proper? Where is the
proof that Widdicombe ever received them ? No witness
speaks of these parties or this transaction, but the witness
Gill, and he says expressly, (page 60, printed testimony, an-
swer to 2d x question,) "I do not know whether they voted
these tickets or not." No other witness speaks of their
voting, and he, Gill, says positively that he cannot prove it.
Now no matter how wrong it may have been in this colored
Deputy Sheriff to take these tickets and tear them up, it is
grossly illegal to deduct them from Widdicombe and give
them to Brooke, when there is no evidence to show that
Widdicombe ever received one of them, or that these parties
ever voted them at all. There is no vote so large that it can-
not be diminished, and none so small that it cannot be made
large enough, if this process is allowable. This Report does
not concede that upon this proof six votes should be deduct-
ed from Mr. Widdicombe and given to Mr. Brooke. The
Majority Report next states that Mr. Widdicombe is shown
to have taken three Democratic tickets from voters as they
marched to the polls, and given them three Republican tickets
in their place. Without going further into the evidence,
they deduct these three from Widdicombe and give them to
Brooke, making a difference of six more votes.

The comments made above, with regard to the six tickets,
are equally applicable here. No witness mentions these
parties or this transaction, but Basil J. Brown, (page 31,
printed testimony, Dep. No. 10.) It is noticeable that he
nowhere pretends to say these parties voted these tickets, or

ever voted at all. For aught that the testimony shows, they
may have them In their pockets to-day. Is it right or legal

to deduct these votes from Widdicombe, and give them, to
Brooke, when there is no proof Widdicombe ever secured

them, or that Brooke did not get them. This Report does