clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
Proceedings and Acts of the General Assembly, 1874
Volume 211, Page 2081   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

838 JOURNAL OF PROCEEDINGS [Mar. 17,

It is agreed that J. G. Seitz, a non-resident, voted for
Brooke, and it is claimed that Sam Williams and Geo. Bow-
ling, non-residents, voted for Widdicombe.

In the case of Bowling, this Report will only refer to his
own proof, (page 106 printed testimony,) upon the question
of residence. As to Sam Williams, it is not shown anywhere
by legal proof for whom he voted, or if he voted at all. The
only witness who speaks as to how S. Williams voted, is Jas.
H. Eitchie, (page 38 printed testimony,) you will perceive
that this witness was not entitled under the law to testify,
and therefore his testimony cannot be noticed by this Com-
mittee or Legislature, (page 37 printed testimony, bottom of
the page.)

Mr. Ritchie was objected to as a witness, because his name
did not appear on the list of witnesses in the notice served on
Mr. Widdicombe, as required by section 59, Article 35, Code
of Public General Laws. It will be seen that Mr. Ritchie
proves this fact beyond all question in his cross-examination,
(page 38, answer to question 1st, 2nd, 3d, in cross-examina-
tion.)

It will be seen that the name of James H. Ritchie appears
in the notice filed as Exhibit B, page 5. It will he noticed
that on page 6, printed testimony, the Sheriff gives a certifi-
cate that a copy of the notice was served on Widdicombe, by
leaving the same at his house, and going to Washington and
telling him of it.

Now the copy spoken of on pages 4-6, was the copy left by
Ritchie whilst acting as Deputy Sheriff, (page 38, Ritchie's
testimony.)

Under this state of the case, Mr. Ritchie's name not being
in the list of witnesses in notice served on Widdicombe, he
was not a competent witness under section 59, Aritcle 35,
Code.

There is therefore no shadow of testimony to prove how S.
Williams voted. It cannot therefore be considered that his
vote can rightfully be deducted from Widdicombe—no law-
ful witness proving that it was ever given to him.

The result of a recount of the votes, making only legal
corrections and allowances, would give Brooke, after adding
Henry Sprigg and Wash, Johnson, and deducting J. G.
Seitz, 2,343, and give to Widdicombe, after deducting Henry
Sprigg, Wash. Johnson, Geo. Bowling and Geo. Locker,
2,845. Add to this count for Mr. Widdicombe, the vote of
Alex. Gross, Sr., who himself swears positively he wanted to
vote the Republican ticket, but was prevented by the Demo-
crats.

 

clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
Proceedings and Acts of the General Assembly, 1874
Volume 211, Page 2081   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  Cannot perform flastmod(): Win32 Error Code = 2

Maryland State Archives