The New York Herald Newspaper, December 15, 1876, Page 4

4 Debate Lo n the Senate on the isiana Election. THE EVILS AND BENERITS OF INTIMIDATION, Mr. Sherman in Defence of the Returning Board. § TO PARTISAN REPORTS OBJECTION OF DEMOCRAT Mr. Morton on the Atrocities Perpe- trated in the South. xoTox, Deo, 14, 1876. prayor this morning, | 26 Chaplain, in bis opentn the Divine blessing upon the committe $ how conduct gations 1m certain uthern States, an prayed that they might ascertain ihe whole truth, whieh 18 so vital to the honor and Welfare of this great peop! | Mr. Davis, dem.) of W. Va, gave notice that on | Thursday next, after the expiration of the morning | hour, he would ask that the ordinary business be sus- | pended, that the Senate might pay its tribute of re- | spect to the memory of Mr. A. T. Caperton, late Sen- | ator from West Virgima, THE LOUISIANA REPORTS, Mr, Surman, (rep.) of Oui, called up the Senate | resolution to print 1,850 extra copies of the Message of resident and accompanying documents in regard receut election in Louisiana for the use of tho Senate, Mr, TaveMay, (dem.) of Ohio, moved to amend the resolution so that there should be printed and stitched or bound with the said Message and documents the memorial of Messrs, Bogy, Stevenson and MeDonald, ug the report of the democratic committee uraing Board in timony tuken by the i mitteo was here he would ask to bave part of the volume. He had been informed testimony Was uot here because i was re- quired betore the inv ating coramittee vow in New Orleans. He would prefer that the printing of this document be postponed until that testimony should reach this city. ARGUMENT OF MR, SURRMAN. Mr. SumeMAN said be could vot allow the statement an Who represented the demderzatio party © de printed with a public document briet reply. He was sorry the per presented by the Senator from . Boy), Known as the Teport of the demo- committee, did net consider the question of in- vs of | g the ives emi Which Witnessed the count by the Ri He sald if the t t Lior y evaded that question entirely. Their yi usisted of an array of technicalities to at the law of Louisiana, ‘The democratic commit- . alleged that under the law of Louisi- kudthere Was no provision made for the eleetion of Presidential electors. It that was so no ove in that State bad ever found it out Mr. Sherman then read trom the law of Lousiana, and Was manifest that the democratic commit y view of tho law. It their nstruction of the law Was true there was no pro- Louisiana for the elvetion of any He denied that the luw of 1872 law of 1 co) vision of law a ar; the mode of co! np ons, Upon t pot the democratic commision had wasted about ot their report, The next objection the committee was that the vacancy bu the Board was not filed by the sppointment of a temoerat, He argued that the questivn of filing the Was one of propriety, but such vacuncy did t tho legal status of the Board, He would not jay Whether the y should have been iilied or Had he been a member of the Returning: Board ae would have been in favor of appointing any dem: irat who be found willing to serve on the Board. democratic committee — also ny ause the whole clerical force fault the Board was republican. Hoe knew of no law re- quiring the Board to employ democratic clerks. The House of Representatives had turned out every clerk and employé of nis (Mr. rman’s) political faith, but republicans did net complain. Mr. Sherman then re- ferred to the charge that the affidavits of the Super- visors of Election in Louisiana as to intimidation were not made within twenty-four hours alter the election, as the laws ot the State requirei, He quoted at length from tho report made by the republican committee, of which be was a them- id that the ’alidavits were properly y the supervisors, He argued that tho demo- committee did not impeach the fairness of the mode of conducting the count of tho Returning Board, in seventeen parishes there was intimidation, and as to the extent of it these zentlemen of the democratic committee uared not commit themselves. He (Mr, therman) was willing to stand not only before the Scnate but betore tie people of the United States and wintwin that there was intimidation in Louisiana so an exteut whieh changed the resuit of the whole tion. There was murder, riot, whipping and yio- nee BY the organized rifle clubs of the democratic y. ‘The members of the Senate as Sonator ought to keep their minds cool and delibe » questions now pending. The elector: or four Staves was in dispute, As to he believed that tt was conceded by all that electoral vote was for Hayes aud Wheeler. s Ranvourt and WiTHERS denied that there nel concession. cratic uid the vote of Florida and’ As to Oregon, he did not would rise to the dignity of a dispute. He believed the cdemocrate candidate himself would hold the vilice of President in pursuance of ‘aud. ARGUMENT OF MR. THURMAN, THURMAN argied that the document whieh it uted bui one side of the Wien both sides should be betore the Senate Mr. Was proposed to print pri tase. mother picture Would be presented. He was eur- prised at the remarks of his colleague (Mr. Sherman) ind be was disposed io answer some of them now, but ibe matter would be before the Senate again, The yeople of the country would see that there was another word ending in ‘ton’? besides “intimidation.” There was such « word as “exaggeration,” He argued that there sould be time to examine both sides of this nuatier, He moved that the further consideration of postponed till to-morrow. rep.) of R. 1, suid it would be a con- rinting oflice if this document could »9 printed now. The speeches on Louisiana could be nude at any other time, The document could be «1 now at less cost than if such printing be post- Tuvemay said the cost of this printing was a tmali matter compared with having a proper case be- lore the people now, Early im the session it was asked that a number of extra copies of this one-sided document be printed, without waiting for the other side, Why its passage in such haste should be asked” he could not understana, unless it was to manufacture puvolic opipiun’ upon one sie Ot the question, His colleague (Mr. Sherinan) had spoken of the report of the democratye committee as being partisan, If they had manitestea any more Partisauship thon bis colleague (Mr Sherman) be (itr. Thurman) tuiled to see 1%, His colleague, even Uhough be was a Senator of the United States, oceu- pied uo higher position before the Louisiana Return- ing Board than any other gentleman oa either side of the commitwes, The President, 1 sending a com- mittee tucre, had acted outside of bis offictal duty, and : ¢ gent by him bad no official authority. President had a right to ay gentioman to yo toa Stare to obtain iniorma- him, 1CRMAN—Ob, yes. He might write a letter Asking some one to ko Witness the blowing up of Hell Gate. (Laughter. ) Resuming bis argument, Mr. TucRMAN said that the President, in sonding bis committee to New Orleans, selecte! ‘the Senator from Obi, his colleague, Stermav), aud three gentlemen who ubers of the House of Representatives; reiors there was a champion iu the Senate present the vresident’s side of the ¢ upposed, champions in the House. Mr. Thurman) said Le would be giad to sce his old | rieud Judge Trumbull occupying # seat upon the floor | i and bear his reply to the statement just made. Mir. Thurman said he was requested to go to New Or- wans by somebody; but be could not, for the life of him, sco what busioess be had there, and he did not go. Of these Senators onthe democratic side who went to New Orleans, vot one of them attended a ses- sion of the Returning Board. Mr. S#kMaN Sud that there wero Senators and Representatives in New Orleans belonging to both parties, ue VHURMAN sald that there was no question but there were democrais in Louisiana, and that there had boon more dem than republicans m thas State for some years post. Ho argued that it was the doty | of the Returning Board to fil the vacancy existing in that Bourd; but it was not filled because the Board in- tended that no democratic eye shouid see or demo- : its proceedings when it came to we tiou of this Returning Board, so tn- and unfair, must now be bolstered up fhe American people, ho said, would the assertion of any man, bo uw his standing, that this thing was f He next refe: high would demand ali of the facts, atlidavits of the Supervisors Of election as to intimida. ton, and argued that tuey were not made within the tine preseribed by law bat were made after the clec- too, in New Orleans, 66 count out Tilden and count in Hayes; to count out Nichols and count tn Packard. dir. Kensay, (dew.) ot N. Y., said the Senate bad ent to Louisiana a sirong and large committee to in- Vestivace and report upou the lacs attending the re- tent election, and when the report shoula be presented fo the Senate the Whole sudject would be properly be- fore this bedy. He thonght this whole matter might be postpoved tmtil the Senate Commitiee made its re- rt. Yas it conducive to the proper and wise solu- Nn Of the questions now agitating the country that t this time, on a motion to print this one-sided docu- ont, the Senator irom Obio (Mr. Shermay) should | Rogy, Stevenson ana McDonald, | thatit bad not | torined the drst duty | Wish to sifut out | would show t | with the loca! nate and the country that the in ali tur, He thouge for the Senate and for the country that the Senate wate until it received a report of its own commitibe and had all the fuets belore it. MR. MOKTON ON INTIMIDATION, Mr. Montox said the great question before the Louisiana Returning Iwas that of fntimiaation, murder and violence. country Wanted to bear about these crimes. [t wanted to hear from the dem. ocratic cominities which visited New Orleans in re- gard to (his intimidation. The report of that commit tee touched this great question of jutimidation with a sing!o paragraph pot as long ag his finger. Mr. Morton then read trom the ieport of the demo- cratic committee and said it admitted that violence existed in Louisiana, but said it was because the gov- erament of the Stace Was @ government of usurpation, Mr. THUKMAN Withdrew. his motion to postpone the further consideration ot the subject until to-morrow, The amendment of Mr, Thurman to bave printed aud stitched or bound with the Message of the President and accompanying documents the memorial of Messrs. ng the report sited New Or- lection 4 of the democratic committee which leana, wus agreed to, Mr.’ Warnes, (dew.) of Va, suid there was no ne- ceasity of printing this volummous document now, when @ great portion of it must be printed again when the Sevute committee made its report upon theclection in Louisiaua, He inquired of the Chairman of the Committee on Priuting (Mr. Authony) what would be the cust of the printing Gt this document Mr. ANTHONY replied, 1t Would cost $500 to print the 1,850 copies and $4,590 to print the 10,600 extra copies. SPKKCH OF ME. MAYAR Bayaxp spoke of the disorders charged on a, and said it was folly to term the gov- nt of that State a government ot law when erpm | such a cutalogue of crime tuerein could be possible. If crime had been committed in Lousiana why was it been panished? The Judge ts con- demned when the guilty escape,’’ was 4 maxim older than the language which we speak. What Governor of aby State except Lousiana Would have assisted i preparing a compilation which showed, not ouly the miserable condition uf bia people, but his own crimi- ual negligence in not protecting them! Mr. Bayard argued (hat the effect of the document now before the Sebute would be to consign to everlasting iniamy the faise eo ip control of that Stute who hac never per- of honest goverument in sup- pressing the crimes they pow parade. He did not the wath, Let it come outund it esults of Congressional interference ate government, ‘Mier further discussion by Messrs. Stevenson, Mor- ton, Tuurman and others the resolution to print the 1,800 copies as amended by Mr. Thurman was agreed 10 without a division. The Senate thea took up the joint resolution to print 10,060 extra copies of the Message of the Presi- dent aud accompanying documents in regard to the Louisiana election, Mr. TuurMAN submitted the same amendment which he offered to u former resolution, which was to have printed, stitebed and bound with the Message and ac- compunying documents the memorial of Messrs. Bogy, Stevenson and McDonald, embracing the report ot the democratic committee which witnessed the countin New Urleans, which was agreea to and the joint resolution pussed ag amended, THE TROOPS AT PETERSBURG, The Cuain Inid betore the Senate a message from the President, in aaswer to the resolution of the Sen- ate of the 6th iust., iu regard to troops being stationed at Petersburg, on election day. Ordered to be printed and he on the table, Also u communication trom the Attorney General, in answer to the Senate resviution of the 12th inst, in regard to the employment of deputy marshals on elec- tion day, The Attorney General says the iniormation called for is not in bis possession, and can only be obtained from marshals of the United States who have the power to appoint deputies, but he will seek to procure the information at as early a day as is practicable, Ordered to ve printed and le on the table. On motion of Mr. MircuKLL, (rep.) of Oregon, the Sonate took up the resolution 14 regard to the Oregon @lector, so as to have it come up as uniimished busl- ness to-morrow, Mr, Bayarn, of Delaware, presented a statement, which was compiled by an officer of the House of Re- presentatives, regarding the couut of the electoral vote by that body since the jormaiion of the govera- | ment. Ordered to be printed. Mr. BourwsLt., (rep.) of Mass., gave notico that on Tuesday next, after the expiration of the morning hour, himsell’'and his culleague would claim the at- tention of the Senate to present the statues contrib. uted by Massachusetts for the National Stasuary Hall. The Senate then, at tive o’cloek, went into executive session, und, when the doors were reopenod, adjourned, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Wasurneron, Dec. 14, 1876, On motion of Mr. Hoar, of Massachusetts, Tuesduy next was designated ag the day on which the proceed- ings of the Houso relative to the preseutation by the State of Massachusotts of the statues of John Win- throp and Samuel Adams shall take place. THE ELECTORAL VOTE, Mr. Kyorr, (dem.) of Ky., Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, reported the following resolution as a substitute for tho ove olfered by Mr. McCrary, of Lowa, and referred to that committeo:— Whereas there are differences of opinion as to the proper mode of counting the electoral votes tor President and Vice President, and as to the wanner of determining snel ques- tious ax may arise as to the lecdlity aud validity of returns ude of such votes b: voral States ti whail be re- nties of the qu votew tay be counted ta » the end, therefore, that th y result declured by "a ceibumul whose autherity no oue can question, and whose decision all will us Hani, Resolved, Fhai a committeo of seven membi Houso be appointed by the: Speaker, to act in conjunction with any similar committee that may be appointed by the Seuate, to prepare aud report wituout delay such « meas- ure, vither legislative or coustitutional, ax may im their Judgment be best calculated to accomplish the desired end: that said committee have port at any time, and that the Clerk of the House inform the Senate of the adop- Resolved, | poiuted by the port what are the privileces, po " ot Representatives in counting the vote fur President aud Vice President of the United States, and that said com- mittee have leave to report at any time, Mr. Kyorr demanded the previous question. ‘The previous question was seconded and the Fesolu- tion adopted without division, THS POST ROUTE BILL Mr. CLark, (dem,) of Mo., from the Post Office Com- mittee, reported back adversely the Senate amend- ments to the Post Route bill ofthe last session, He stated that the amendments for establishing fast mail trains betweon New York, Chicago and other points re- enacted the franking privilege and gave the first, secona and third Assistant Postmasters General au- thority to sign contracts without their Leing signed by the Postmaster General. The amendments had not been particularly considered by the committee, but tue committee recommeuded a non-coucurrence because of their being placed on a lost Route bill where it is un- usual to have any special legislation, The amendments were nou-concarred in, POST OFFICE APPROPRIATION BILL, The House then, ata quarter of two P. M., went into Committee of the Whole (Mr, Cox, of New York, ip tho chair) on the Post Office Appropriation bill, The total amount appropriated 1s $32,983, 125, of which $2,338,460 is appropriaced us a deticiency of receipts below ex- penditures, A discussion ag to the cost of railruad mail trausportation ‘was carfied on, principally be- tween Mr, Holman, of Indiaua, who bad ch: ofthe bill, and Mr. Reagan, of Texas, In the course of it Mr. Holman stated that under the reduced compensa- tion establisbed = last session =the cost had been reducod from $9,543,000 to $8,556,233. Zhe commitice estimated that the cost for the next fisca! year would be. about $8,800,000, but it recommended au appropriation of $9,000,000, He thought that the rates paid to railroad companies were much too high, aud that the amount might fairly be reduced by $2,000,000, He hoped that such a reduc- | Hon would be eflucted im the next Congress. Another dis number of cle try. Mr. Caynom, (rep.) of LIL, offered an amendment increasing the appropriation for the pay of clerks, aud arcued that there were not a suificient number of clorks employed in certain post ollices to do the work of such post office. Mesers. Hoiwax, of Indiana, and Brovst, of Geor- gia, opposed it, holding that if the number of cierks Wus iuereased the posimastors Would have nothing to ao. ‘The amendment was lost, ‘The amount appropriated for Post Office clerks 1s $3,200,000, and the Postmaster General is directed to cause un official inquiry to be made into the presont rates of compensation, with a view to a more equitabie adjustment and reduction thereof, The item for lot ter carriers is $1,750,000, and the Postmaster General is directed to fnouire into the matter of letter carriers and to reduco their namber and the number of mail deliveries to the reasonable requirements of the public service. ton took place on the subject of the in post oilices throughout the coun- PAY OF NEW YORK CARRIERS, Ap amendment offered by Mr. Stone, of Miseouri, to Increase the amount bo $2,000,000, gave rise to a dis- cussion On that subject, tn the course of which the in- acequacy of the pay of the New York carriers was in+ sisted on by Mr, Cox, of New York, who, in response to « playful suggestion from Mr. Foster, of Ohio, repu- diated the idea of aiming at the favor of the lever car- riers, He said be wanted no favor,from them, that ail the poopie of his district wanted aim tor Congressman, that only twenty-eignt dissented, and that his election bad not been brought about by intimidation or “buil- dozing,” but lad been a fait id square election, Which bad leit him ir such an independent position that he could speak for justice to these men. Mr. HOLMAN opposed any incfease of letter carriors’ pay, asserting (hat these officials in New York were betior paid than whe average skilled meebanie, Mr. Stone’s amendment was rejocted. ker. Stow® then moved to make tho pay of letter carriers in cities of over 100,000 population as fol- lows :—For the first year’s service, $800 per um ; second year, $900; third and following years, $1,000; and iv cities of less than 100,000 population between $400 and $800 a year, according to the length of ser- vice. Mr. Houmas made a point of order against the amendment as being new fogtsiation and not in tho bc a of econowy. The point of order was sus- tained. Mr. SCHLEICHER, (dem.) of Texas, offered an amend- ment increasing the appropriation for mail transporta- Uob On star routes and on Kicamboats from $6,000,000 to $6,287,003, and mont was agreed tu. Without disposing of the bill the committee rose. The SPeakxe laia before House a s8ago from the F it relative to the removal ot the Sioux Iu- Referred to the Com- dians to the Indian Territory. mittee on Indtan Affairs, The House then at half past four adjourned. | the city to any piace beyond it, and tm these charters | and authority 1s swept away. Thon, hus the power to ! franctise if starting from the shores of New York, re- -wmuch tadignation in Brooklyn, FERRY FRANCHISES. BIGHT OF NEW YORK TO COLLECT A FERRY LICENSE—ARGUMENTS OF COUNSEL. Hartvorp, Conn., Deo. 14, 1 ‘The case ot The Mayor, Aldermen, &c., of New York, vs, The New England fransier Company was argued here to-day betore Judge Nathaniel Siipman, of the United States Circuit Court, in Champers. | ARGUMENT OF GROKGE TICKBOR CURTIS. The case opened at ten o'clock A. M. with an argu- ment by Mr. George Ticknor Curtis on behalf of the city of New York. Mr, Curtis said that this was a suit brought to re- Strain the defeudants from: employing a steamer known as the Maryland on a ferry route between Mott Haven and Jersey Cuy as a link between the New Engiand railroads and the Penosylvania Railroad, Mr. Curtis suid that this churter contemplated con- trol of every ferry established from any point within the words “Islund of Maphattan" were used to cover the city, and with no intent to fimit the jarisdicuos Of the city authorities to that island aione in the event of the extension of the elty limits, Such language was’ usca for the sole purpose of coupling together the mhabitants of the city and of the whole island in rezpoct tothe grants to ve made, the granting power tuking into its scope the | whole ipbabitants, Further, the Montgomery charier extends the territorial Jurisdiction of the elty not ouly over all of Manhattan Island, but also across the Har- Jom River to low water snark ou the Westchester side, covering consequently the bed of that river Let us look into the matter of these terry irunehises— whether the right to esiablish ferries i merely a polit ical or police power. Ln May, 1845, the Legislature passed a law regulating terries between Now York und dong Island, This was 4 resumption by the Legs ture of rights granted by the ancient ters to the city, gud the quesuon might then have jaivly arisen = Whether — such law was constitutional, Ip order to restram any one trom tniringing on the miguts ol the eny tt 1s not hecessary to show that the city has already occupied the route, and this 1# decided in the case aginst the Staten Island Company reported in $8 Jones & Spencer, the terry right wé both private property and police power, uud in either event the New Engiand ‘Transicr Company is iniringing. Pagaing we the ques- Uiou of the righis accruing through the annexation of Morrisania, &c., Mr. Curtis argued that the language Of the uct Was sufficient to extend all und every one of the corporate rights of the city sto this new territory. The other side, he sald, ad. mits this, except as to the ferry * fran- echises, Now, the right to estabheh a ferry belongs to the sovercign power, not to the riparian proprivtor, iLitis a publ power, in which the lives and property o: e1tizens are concerned. 1s that sov- ereign power in the county of Wostchester or the town of Morrissania’ If you will look at the act uf anvexation it will be seen that all local jurisdiction esiablish ferries in tuut tert.tory been reserved to the State? No, forthe Aunexation act extends to this new territory all the powers of the ¢ ‘ty of New York that existed under its anctent charter, All that toe act roully did Was to extend the limits of the oity’s juris- diciion, With powers unimpaired, Ws it A FERRY? The next question 1s whether the defendants are operating a terry. In the case of Fay, 15 Pick- ermg, Justice Shaw jays it down thatthe right of sorrtage is to transport passengers, currtages, &¢., for hire, ‘We must not only consider whether the de- Jondants are operating a ferry according to the com- mon law definition of according to the laws of New York, ‘The other side may ask how a distinction shall Lo made between a ferryboat and a coasting vessel do- ing the sawe kind of business, a8 many ci those ply- tug on the Sound. There must be foraterry tixcd points of departure and arrival; bighways on we land by which trafic reaches tue vessel ; a voat ur vessel operating in the nature of # bridge; tho practice of receiving compensaiion for transportation; 1 brief, » boat merely ag the continuation of a highway instead of a bridge over the stream. In the Peupic vs Babcock, 11 Wenuell, ibis question was considered and decided by Chiei J ve Nelaon (in Lhe maticr of aterry on Niagara River) that a person bad a terry gardicss of whore bis opposite terminus was. ‘Tho tact What this vessel (the Maryland) bas 4 coasting iicense 18 Mmmaterial, or whether her landing 1s in another State or whether she passes through waters under the control of Cungress. Tuking the latter point, it is clear that Congress has no power to interfore with the forry rights of @ State or a cuy. Mr, Curie suid be would pass over the matters of mail carriage und clutwed uso of the boat as a conaccting link between va- rious ratiroad lines, and in conclusion said:— “tt Your Honor’s decision is in fayorel the plaintiffs it would inciude am injunction, but an appeal, if taken in proper timo, would operate usa supercedeas, und | Ro inconvenience will happen to the deiendants,”? ARGUMENTS YOR THE COMYANY. Mr. Simeon E, Baluwin, of New Haven, onéof tho counsel tor the New Engiund Transier Compunyy fol- lowed, and clamed that un important questiog was, Whether a mouopoly wus being created by the city of New York. [tis evident that the charters give no ferry rights to shore on thi the route of the Mary! Jepgth, and neither terminiis ou Manhattan Island, In ne instance hus such a circuitous garded agaferry. This is Dot moroly & passage across A Water course, but tollows the line of four water courses, and the grievance of New York is pot that the boat lands on its shores, but that tdon’t § The boat is in nowise fitted for gon- eral trailic, but solely for carrying railroad cars; and those cars are only taken op board on the arrival of trains, and no passengers or freight are taken, except convey2d on the cars. The common law doos not rec- ognize such purposes as a ferry; oo the coutrary, tho pussages of this versel are cousting voyages im the strictest sense, Ibe grunts in the Montgomery char- ter are clearly mopopoilvs aud against common Fights, and do not righttuily extend to crutt other toan such ‘as Were jn use when the grant was made. It Now York enty bad endeavored to estabiish such a steam line as that of the Maryland wouldn't it have bogn speedily eujoined by the people? In support of the theory that tho ferries contemplated ig tbe ancient charters of New York coatd not properly refer to the steamer Muaryiand system of transporsation, Mr. Baldwin cited vuriol decisions in es Where suits had been brought to prevent the construction of railroad bridges, as imimical to the rights of owners of bridges 10 the vicinity, who held such rights under grants made before railroad bridges were known, On the same principle it may be argued that a railroad ferry 1s not a ferry under a fair construction of the jaw. The cases of Aiken vs. The Western Rall- road (20 New York), and Fitch vs, Tue Shore Line Ratiroad Ferry at New London, Conn., wero cited jp support of this theory in both cases, the de- cisions having been favorable to the railrouds. Reach- ing the poimt of the extension of the city by aunexa- tion, Mr, Baidwin cited tho case of Detroit vs. The Plavk Road Company (12 Michigan), in which the city jimits were extended so us to cover a place where the company had a tollgato, and it was decided that this extension did not oxterd to the jurisdiction of the city so as to probivit the existence of such toi! gate of interference with it, Tne Court then took a Feces to two P, M, Mr. George H. Forster, of Now York, for the Trans- fer Company, argued that it was no tore ct a ferry route than tho routes ot steumers to Albany or Lridge- port, and that it was merely a section of the through ine of raliroads; that the jurisdiction of New York dues not extend by the aucieut grants beyoud Manbat- tan Island, and that the steamer Maryland, sailing under coasting license, 1s under no legal obligation to pay license foes to New York, cision reserved. THE MADHOUSE HORROR. The appalling story of the outrages which Mrs, Jane ©. Norton described as having been perpetrated upon hor by brutal nurses in the Bloomingdale Lunatic Asylam was retated in yestorday’s Henao and created Heartielt sympathy for the lady was expressed, and a universal desire tor a thorough mvestigation of the matter was manifested. Mrs. Norton is anxious that one should be had and will aid it by every means in her power, Sho is taking steps to give to the public a concise and caretul ac- count of the bad treatment experienced by herself and many others who bave been equaliy unfortunate. She does not seek any persvual mdemuitication for ber miseries. Her only object iy to prevent repetitions of these cruclties. Yesterday a Heraxp reporter visited Mrs. Norton at her home, No. 247 Livingston street, Brooklyn, to ob: tain any further details in the ludy's possession to sup- plement her narrative of the previous day. she had been absent durti @ greater part of the afternoon, having gone to New York to seo Dr. Urdronneaux, State Commissioner of Lunacy, who had investigated her case last October. Mrs. Norton's object was to as- certain why she and other persons concerned with her hail not been notitied, us had been previously arranged, to hear the Doctor's report anu decision on the test! He had signified his tnten- ‘port and decision belore the of the institution and the wi Board of Governor nesses on or alter the Sth of ocomber. But on Wednesday Mrs. Norton , learned — that tho report bad been mad as indicated in yestorday’s Hxratp, without her kpowleage, Dr. Ordromneaux i beaeteas § wid Mra, Norton that hia reuson for not inviting her to hear his decision was the refusal of the officials of Bioomiugdale to give bim the use of tho Sixteenth Sireot Hoapital for the meeting, This was ali that Mra. rion had to say about the legal aspects of the case at prosent. Some further conve: ou of aa interesting charac. ter took place been her and the reporter in rotation to the discipline of the asylum. She said that owing to her own troubl he had bad lithe opportunity of ob- serving those of ot! aware that nearly all of the patieuts had bwen subjected, at dif- ferent times, to the stratijacket aua other equally uncomfortable measures of restraint. She added scarcely anything new to ber staiement published yes- torday, and so the reporter retired, SUICIDE ON BLACKWELL'S ISLAND. god ‘Thirty-three, an Irishman by virth, an inmate of the Workhouse on Blackwoll’s Island, during a fit of delirium tremnons, Jumped out of a flith story window of the institution om Suaday. Ho reveived a commnuted fracture of the skull, from ied last Monday morning. . NEW YORK HERALD, FRIDAY, DECKMBEK 15, 1876.—-TRIPLE SHEET. GENERAL BARLOW'S REPORT. A Closes Scrutiny of the Late Florida Election. CONFLICTING CLAIMS Alleged Fraudulent Manipulations of the Ballots Cast. ‘Affidavits by White and Colored Inspectors. A Full Account of.a Complicated Muddle. The following report of the facts bearing on the re- cent election in Florida has been rendered to Presi- dent Grant by General F, C. Barlow, ex-Atiornoy General of the State of New Yort, who was sent to that State for the purposo of investigating the allegea ciection ftauds:— To Tue PResipeNt ov tox Uxiran StatEs:— At your request [ went to Tallabasseo, reaching ther en November 17. and remajuipg until the can vass was Gnished and the result announced on De- cember 6, ‘ Whether the republicans or the democrats carried the State upon the Presidential ticket, and whether “there was a fair count,’ are questions which | have been often asked aud which | am not willing to answer without stating, in connection with my own conclusions, ihe evidence and the questions arising upon it, My reason for this course 1s that the points involved are such that no one, in my opinion, can arrive at any conclusion on tho whole case with entire confidence that he 1s absolutely correct In his judgment, The cause of this uncertainty is that there was a ts before the Board upon which a largo mony Was imtroducva Ly aifidaviis (some of them being made by marksmen and some not), and as to which considerable viva voce testimony was uiven, the quostions urising On conilicting evi- dence, and involving in some cases difficult queations of law, a& tosome of which, at any rate, fair-minded men might well differ. No onc mun cap have read all this testimony or be familiar with it, though probably the members of the Capyvassing Board have the most thorough knowledge of it of uny one. I will stute the main questions which arose and such conclusions as I have been able to arrive at, Tho returns on thotr tace, as declared by the Board, sbowed a majority of somo 40 for the Hayes’ electors. In reaching this result, however, a certain retura from Baker county, made by the Caynty Judge and Sheriff, was beld to be the true on@primd facie, in preference to another one signed by the County Clerk, lu my opin'on thg Board was right in coming to this conclusion on the {ace of the papers. But it afterwards appeared that the County Judge's return bad omitted two precingis, and when this amis: sion wus rectified, the trae vote of the county ap- peared to give a majority of 96 for Tilden instend of 41 tor Hayes, and the county vote was corrected ac- cordingly. This transaction has been called the Baker county “swindle” ana ‘fraud,’ but, in my opinion, these denunciations are entiry unjust. Ju Clay county a democratic majority of 23 had been omitted by the county canvussers ou the grouud that tho inspectors at one precinct had not been sworn, These votes wero allowed by the State Board under tts judictal powers. Having thus disposed of the ques- Lions which might be said to arise on the face of the returns, the Board procecded to hear and determino the several attacks made by each party upon the otbor, ALACHUA COUNTY. Tho democrats charged thatin Archer preciuct No, 2 in Alachua county the true vote was—republican 180, democratic 136; while the precinct return made it re- publican 309, democratic 136. 1t was claimed that 219 votes bad been traudulently added to the repub- ican vote. On their sido the democrats produced one phere st & white democrat, who said that he had stood all day at the polis and taken the name ot every man who voted from the outswe of the room, and he produced a list of them, being 306 in number. And he said that not exceeding fifteen voted inside the room. Several other whito democrats (somo by affidavit, and two orally) testiied that at the Close of the canvass the inspectors declared the vote as now claimed by the domocrats, Ou Novomber 11, ove Moore, # white republican in- Spector, made an aflidavit that the truo vote was as tho jocrats claim, and that any other return was false. November 29 ho made anvtber allidavit that the re- turn t nb he authorized one of his colleagues to sign bis name at the close of the canvass (that is, the returo as made) was corroct, and that hts affidavit on the 11th was made under ‘great mental oxcitement,”’ and should not bo taken to impeach tho return, A tow days luter he made another affidavit, reiter- ating that of the 11th, and on November 29 he ap- peared in person velore the Board, and said that the true vole, us cast, canvassed and announced, wus re. publican 180, democratic 136, and that he signed, but did not swear to, his ailidavit of the 20th (nade on the republican side), and tbat be was paid $100 for doing I understand that the person who was said to have paid this monoy put in ap aMdavit denying 1. Floyd Dukes, a wegro democratic inspector, went through suvstantially the same periormauce, though be said that he was paid or promised only $25 jor his repub- lean affidavit, the paymett or promise being denied on the stand by the person who was said to have made it. Moore and Dukes were called on the democratic side to impeach the return, and the only legal effect of their testimony was* to’ show that they were wholly unworthy of credit; Moore, because be was a scoun- drel, and Dukes, because he was imbecile; and tho ouly possible conclusion was that their evidence should be eliminated from the case. In like manner one Webster, the County Clerk, and Belton, a justice of the peace, made affidavits thut Uhey suspected that the return was fraudulent, Their evidence goes for nothing. The democrats then proved tbat three days aiter ‘the election the ballot box (which Webster proved had been kopt seaicd up in the meantime) was opened and ouly 277 votes found therein, But tho law ald pot re- quiro the ballots to be put back in the dox, and if the vepublicans bad tampered with the box they would not havo taken out any of the 316 votes, but would rather have added to them to make the ballots correspond with the return. In support of the retura the republicans put on the stand Black, the republican inspector, and Vance, the republican clerk of the poll. Both were colored men ot more than ordinary education, and thoy swore positively that the roturn as mado was correct, and donied all fraud. | Hero the Geueral proceeds to describe the conditions as to tho voting of 1874, regarding which contradictory statcments were made by the republicans and demo- crats ug to the aggregate vote of the preciuct, the for- mer claiming a large tucrease, He sa: But it should be remembered that ihe vote through- Out tho State was enormously increased—{rom 36,157 in 1874 to 48,614 1m 1876—and also that there is no pre- Cinct registry, but that those registered in the county may vote at any poll; and that, im pom of fact, large wasses of voters (especially negroes) viten change from one voting place to «nother, irom motives of salety, &c ; and also that, to add Box 1, to the democratic result of Box 2 (316), would sail make a very large increase. The vote of the whole county on tbo returns w: Democratic, 1,287; republican, 1,084; republican majority, 717 In 1872 4 was:—Republican, 1,506; demvcratic, 772; republicay majority, 734, In 1874 :t'was:—Repudlican, 1,067; democratic, 756; repablican majority, S11. By ue census of 1875 the voting population was :—Blacks, SO; whites, 1,193. The republican majority of the Board sustained the return as made, JACKBON COUNTY. ‘Tho republicans attacked severul procinets in Jack- son county which gave a democratic majority. Two ouly were thrown oat—Friendsbip Church and Cam p- bvellton. The later 1 know noting of As to the t er, the proof was this, both the attack and de- fence being by affidavit. Hayes and Long, col- ored republicans, one wa inepector, another a United States Supervisor, mado aifida signing their own names, a8 loliows :— That Stevens, a democratic inspector, dreve Long, the Supervisor, out of the room and kept bim out all day, The process of voting as well as the position of the ballot boxes is here described as reudering it impossi- bie for any voter to sce his ballot deposited in the box, which was six feet back from a window aud two feet from the floor, the window sill being six feet trom the ground, General Barlow aiso refers to afiidavits going to prove that the box wWastampered with after the close of the poll. The return showed only forty-four repubiican to 145 democratic votes, Opposing alf- davits aro here given which go to prove that the voting could be seen both from the windows and doors of the church which was used as a polling place. ‘the republican affidavits in two or three other pre- ints of this county stated the same arrangement of the ballot boxes (the window six eet bigh and the box two feet from the floor), and if this wore so it tended to show a concerted scheme. ‘The vote of this county on the face of the returns was democratic, 1,397; republican, 1,299; dem gratis, majority, 98. “In 1872 1¢ was democratic, {i0; republican, 1.109; republican majority, 170 In 187 it was democrat, 897; republican, 1,256; republican majority, 369. iy the consus of 1875 (geverally supposed to bo im- pervect) the voting population was;—Blacka, 1,508; whites, 1,142. KRY WEST, MONROR COUNTY. Tho republicans attacked the poil im the Third ward of the city of Key West, in Monroe county, which gave the totlowing vot Democratic, 401; republican, 59, The republicans by ailidavit show that thoir chalieng- ors wero interfered with, and that tho democrats took possession of the box before all the votes were counted. That the canvass was continued next day outside the voting preeinet in dispute It will hardly be questioned that this adjournment (whieh was not denied) wus itlegal, or that 1t imposed on the other side the duty of clearly showing that the votes had not been tampered with. The facts were Practicniy adnaitted by Attorney General Little, of | Ob, Contradictory testimony taken regarding the adjournment of the canvass, and some ailiduvils showed that the republicans ¢arried Key West by a small majority, the calculation being based, however, on the canvass during the lirst session. The vote of this county (Monroe) ou the returns was—Democratic, 1,047; repubiican 950; democratic majority, 67. AS corrected by throwing out this poll, it was— Democratic, 645; republicau, 921; republican major- | 3. in 1872 it was—Democratic, 632; republican, 280; democratic majority, 362. In 1874 (Comgresstona: election only) it was—Demo- cratic, 609; republican, 657; democratic majority, 12 By the census of 1 the voung population was— Black», 760; whites, 4,806. I. is proper to say that there is a large body of Cu- bans at Key West, who ure aaid to frequently change their party to large 2805, voted at this election I win not informed, MANATER COUNTY. The republicans attacked the county of Manatee which, on the returns, gave the tollowing vote:—Dem- Tepublican, 46; democratic majority, 236. Here the County Clerk appointed by the Gevernor totliavucancy did uot qualify, consequentiy there was no County Clerk or Deputy to register or certify to registry lista as the iw dircets. (ieneral Barlow gocs on to describe the muddle caused by this state of things, especially because there wero no polling places designated, But oo either Wednesd: or Thursday (November 29 or 30) the republican allegaiions against the county brought this point to their potice, and 1 am told that there was stil! time, by telegraph ing to Fort Mead, to get proot buck before Slouday, December 4; but 1 can- not speak certuinly on this poiui. Furthermore, two credible republicans swear that they tried to get down to this couuty to learn the truth of the cuge, but were stopped by certain democrats on the way and com- peiles to turn back unless they produced credentials from the Democratic State Committee, or weat on under democratic guara, This | believe to be true, aod Lam satistled that the republicans made every effort to get ito the count; The vote this year was:—Democratic, 262; Nean, domoerutic majority, 236. 7 cratic, 201; republican, $1; democratic majority, In 1874— Democratic, 249; republican, democratic majority, 172. The ‘repub!iean vote thus fell off some Anirsy-four per cont trom 1874, while the democratic Voto increased, and this while the increase of both sides throughou: the State was very large, By the census of 1875 the voting population was:— Blacks, 18; whites, 4 Total, Bi. nt, beside the point that thero were no registry list the poils (which, 1t wa: 1) arc vital to an election under a systom of registration), ‘was that there could not possibiy be any valid election if no polling places were appointed, and that 1% 18 20 al er to say that voters could ana did go to the last year’s places. lt was claimed that this, at least, was of the substance, and that the Board could not disre- gard the defect, Tho Board threw out the county, Mr. Cocke dis- senting. JEVVERSON COUNTY. ‘The democrats attacked the county of Jefferson, which gave a large republican majority. To ao arga- ment submitted to the Board I went over the attack- ing ailldavits with as impartial a scrutiay as | could give to them, and on ti@ir face (without reference to the republican denials), I made a deduction of some sixty Votes trom tbe repubiican majority, which, and which only, the Beard aliowed, Among the grounde of attack were an over vote compared with the last census, the election officers: being canvassers at the polls. That being an tuspoctor of elections disqualified the County Judge from the merely ministerial duty of adding up the figures in the county canvass, seemed tomo to be au absurd proposition. In my own State the just elected Governor, at present Comptroller, as muny have dono before him, will act ag a canvasaer of of bis own votes—but, as it is purely a ministerial duty, no ove has thought of objecting. No vorrection was made to this county, except tho sixty votes above mentioued, and, 1u wy opinion, that ‘was a perfectly right decision upon the evidence as it then appeared. DUVAL CouNTY, Duval county, largely republican, was attacked by the democrats on the ground that the county return ‘was signed by tho County Clerk and a justice only, te County Judige being present, taough prowsting. 1 am satisfied that upon the facts which appear the return ‘was entirely logal, though this is upip:portant, as the precipot returns were produced and the canvass made Jrom them, as in the case of Baker county. Attorn General Cocke objected to this to the last, as appeat by nis protest. ‘Various individual votes wero objectod to, but tho proof, in my opinion, failed to justify the réjection of more than two. Pout 13, LYow cousTY. Here the democratic objections were that the polis were opened before the iegal hour for the purpoae of cutting off tho democratic inspector, It was also charged that small ballots were cast by republicans with their regular tickets, so as to swell the count General Barlow A very simple explanation relieved this part of tho case of diicuity. Buwes and the County Clerk showed that the sheets of the poll list were not numbered or fastened Soqacting when returned, and that in making the certified copy in the lativr’s office an interior sheet bad been put first instead of the one ov which Bowes appeared us the twelfth voter. And this oupiinee tho tact that some eighteen names appeared on the corti! copy atter Dortsch, the third voter from the” Fieming’s tgnorance of these names did not n prove that they were tctitious, because voters often come from a distance, and might well como in blocks Or masses lor protection at an excited election, Some other poimts were made in respget to this poll, but as the democratic member of tha Board, wno knew M Bowes well, docs not object to this poll in his prove: ldo not think 1 worth while to notice it further. At one time I thought the attacking testimony strong; but, on farther consideration, Tam satisfed that no one can complain that the poll wus retained on the proofs, HAMILTON COUNTY. | One precinct in Hamilton county seéms to have been rejected, and it was siated at the time that the demo- cratic member concurred im this, but this must be a mistake, as be condemns itim his protest, The tacts of this case [am not familiar with, If, as Mr, Cocke says (see it annexed), it was on the ground that “two republican inspectors absented themselv from tho polis several times during the day,” i clusion certainly cannot bo justified, but I presume it was for some othér cause. Not a single vote was thrown out on the ground of intimidation, Io certain other preciucts than those above meationed vyoies were thrown out for various causes, amounting in the- aggregate to soven repub- lican and wwenty-six democratic, and the republicans gainod four over the vote as originally declared by their majority in Dado county, which came im lute. As to expressing my own opinion in the premises, 1 have hesitated long, because ihe facts being before the padlic, ‘yuan is capable of forming his own jodgment upon them, and one man’s conclusions are ‘as much enutied to respect as another's, I should have reduced the vote 1m Archer precinct No. 2 by deducting 219 votes from the republic: majority, though upon the conflict of evidence | think that one might with perfect fairness and honesty decide the otber way. The Congressional Committee, by proper examina. tion, can demonstrate almost to a certaluty which side is right in this controversy. Having in this cage corrected tho retura against the positive denials of the election oilicer: ould throw out Friendship Churth precinct, in Jackson county, although tho frauds were denied there. 1 think tho weight of evidence shews frauds on the purt of the democratic juspectors, and there is no means of giving relief short of rejecting the whole poll, As to the Campbeil precinct I cannot say, Jf the Archer precinct revuras were sustained upon the ground Uust the burden of proof is upon those us- Sailing it, and every presumption is to be made tn favor of an official return and the acts of election off- cers, and bence that a great preponderance ot evidence should be required to reject it, then, 1n my judgment, Friendship Church precinct should’ stand upon the game principle. I should not have rejected the Key West precinct in Monroe county, Courts are reluctant to reject whole polls, thereby disiranchising the Innocent with the guilty, and it never should be done except upon very clear ee that it 1s impossible to place any ree liance on the return, 1 should net have been willing to throw out the county of Manatee, The absence of cercitled copies of the registration lists at the polls would not, m my opiaion. justify the exclusion of the county without proof that those who vowed were, in point of fact, not Fogistored, How they generally | But if tt had been proved beyond question that no | poling places were designated, Lam at a loss to seo how there could have beca a legal election, or how the so-called vote of the county could be canvassed, how- ever great a bardship it might be that those who did actasily go to the last year’s polling places aud cast their votes should jose them. And tt weuld not alter Ue cage If 1t had been proved (which was not the case, nor can it be presumed, as hereatter explained) that the County Commissioners were republicans, Bat the proof that Ho polling places were fixed rests Upon a single ullldavit, and it is not cloar that the a tention of the other side was directed to the point in time to contradict 1. That an election was beld aud returos duly made probably ereaiecs a presumption that all the prelimmary steps were properly wken, &nd ifthe Couaty Commissioner had tailed in so 1m- portant a duty, it is Lard to believe that it would not have bees a mutter of pablic notoriety, while I cannot Journ that it was ever heard of until Green made bis aitidavit, Upon this atate of facts I should not be wiil- mg (0 resort to so harsh @ measure upon u sing parte aflidavit, Tbe precise truth upon this point can readily be as- certained, and 1 it shall appear that oo polling places were appointed it Will be impossible to complarn of UI action of the Board, over harsh may have been the rule applied oy them. Doubtless some of the members of the Board know Mr. Green personally, and know much better than a mere spectator how much reliance w&s to be placed upon his accuracy and truthfulness, And, in my judgment, they cannot be thought dis- honest tn having relied upon this proot As to Lhe action of the Board ip Hamilton county, T do not know the incts and provis, and can give no opinion, It was repprted in T thai Mr. Cocke he resale in this county, but l see that he condemns it. matter ought to be mentioned, It has his prot One othor | by the police as“ | ocen vehemently asserte1 »y demorrate that al | the county offeers, who bave charge. of eivetions | ore repuplicans While it is true that they are ap- | ported by the Governor, yet tts asserted, und 1 be- lieve truly, that Governor Stearug, as well as bis prede- sor, Governor Hart, adopted the liberal policy of appouting democratic ofllcers in strong democratic counties, And, however that may be, it is a | fet that many of thése county oilicers acted with the democratic party at this éleetion. In a county ke Polk, for exampie, w east 456 democratic aud only six repuuheat Votes, i 18 tale Lo suppore that | the machinery was iu republican hands, Aud [ aw | satisHed that itis wholly unfair to reason upon the | theory that ali the election officers were republicans, 1 have come to these conelusions with great Resita tiog, and | am conse:ous that tn my desire to do exuet | Justice I may have borne too Severely against my own party, But, it so, my errora ot jadgment will readily | be detected, the evidence upon which I base my o} | tons emg fully set forth. I have simply tried to put myself in the position which an tmpartial court would | occupy im the mutter, | Annexed to General Barlow's letter are the state. | mentof © A. Cowgill! and the protest of Attorney | General Cocke, The former gives some details of taxte | enumerated by General Barlow, andthe latter bag | already been published in the Henao, THE PARISH WILL, YESTERDAY'S PROCKEDPINGS BEFORE SURROGATE | D@RLAND—AN ADJOURNMENT APTER RECESS UNLIL THURSDAY-—A S.TTLEMENT PROBABLE, PovcuKgkpsix, Dec, 14, 1876." Further examination in the Parish will case was re- sumed before Surrogate Peter Dorland to-day, All parties were a littie iate in arriving this morning and they had to crowd their way to their seats, Mr. Thompson, counsel tor Mre. Mary Parish, called Mrs. Willam Jobnston, us the first witness for the | Comtestante, She confirmed the testimony previously given by several witnes#es as to the pleasant relation. shipexising for years, to ber own personal knowb | @dge, between Mr, and Mrs. Parish, ATTENTIVE TO MISS MATT, George Ladue was tho next witness, Resides in the town of Poughkeepsie, on What was known as the Thomas Parish place; went there in the spring o: 1865; my residence Was 100 yards (rom the homestead of Thomas Parish; [was a farmer and gurdener und | had business tu the house helping to clean, whitewash, shake carpets, &c.; trom 1565 to 1870 all was peace and quiet between Mr. and Mrs. Purtsh; I never saw | anytuing tothe contrary; L was in and out of the house duy and @Meuing; lie seemed to love bis wife as well as any man loyed lis wife; be always kissed ber when be went away; this was so till Misa Haye arrived at the place. Cross-examined—I saw a difference within three weeks alter Miss Hayt came there; ho paid more at tention to Miss Hayt than he did to hig own wife; this was my eyesight; never saw any Unpleasant talking betweon Susie and Mrs. Parish; never heard auything between Mr, and Mrs. Varish for six months after Susio came; nothing but acts that showed forth. Mrs, Surah Ladue, wife of the previous witness, core roborated the testimony of her husband, and said, be- sides, that Mrs, Parish kept ope girl, and sometimes witness was empioyed three or four daysin a week. fuss HaYt Goxs To KUROPE. Augustus Jewett was next sworn-—iteside at Pough- keepsie; am twenty-ive years of age; bave known Yhomas Parish and his wife intimately for twelve years; Was inthe habit of spending my vacations there in 1864; was also in the habit of spending Satur. days and Sundays’ there; continued that up to the time of separation; gometimes would go there Friday night and stay until Monday morning; recoileet whun My, Parish was making bis preparations for going to Europe tor the first time; ho said he was going to take Miss Hayt with him, bat not bis wie; Miss Hayt camo there in 1869, and went to school at Vassar College, where she remained bout a year; sometimes sho caine home every other ‘eek and sometimes every week; she was then past sixteen; during all this time 1 never witne: unkindness or coldness, not until the se when ho went to Europe, in August, and Mrs. Parish leit him the samo month} she went back to the home. atead for five or six weoks aiter Mr. Parish wontto Eu. rope; Mr, Parish's mother was there, old and feeble, and neoded a nurse; [ think Ellen Lusk wag attending tho old lady as nurse wbout the time of the separa. tion, Mr. Jewott was not cross-examined, WHAT AN UNDERTAKER KNOWS. h G, Frost sworn—Resido at Poughkeepsie; am an insurance agent and undertaker; have knowo ‘Thomas Pariah ae long as 1 can remeney, Mrs, Parish since 1861; was a dentist in 1861 and Milod teeth for both of them; was in the habit of visitin, them once or twice a week in 1864 and 1865 to small parties, and that intimacy was continued gp, to the ‘me of separation; in November, 1863 to 1870, was in Josep! | the burness business with Mr. Parish, when I bought him out; Mr. Parish was at the store nearly overy aay; Parish came to the store three or four times a week und some weeks daily; oftentimes they would come ip .to gether, and Mrs. Parish would drive home, and sometimes evenings she would como in and they would go to lectures and concerts together; sometimes she would bave to wuit for Mr. Parish, and I would fo Clark's saloon or other places ater him and he would turn aud go somotimes as late as ton o'clock Ree on such occasions he was feeling rather jubilant. In 1889 he showed me a will ho took from the fe; the will named Nathaniel B, Hayt, of Now. res said he had destroyed or annulled a previous wi dir. Thompsov—We now give notice to them to pro- duce the will (meaning a will other than the one now ia contest.) Mr. Thorne—We hav'nt got It. Witness—He said he bad made provision for hig wile aud daughter; said it wis drawn by William J. Thorne; he suid Mr, Danicl Fearon Smith, of Now York, and Natbante) B, Hayt and myself wore execu- tors, Q. Did he state what he lett? (Objectea to and ob- jection overruled. Witness—l do not remember the smaller provisions, but the remainder of hig estate and the Paris! i estate, hotd in trust, was to be equall; twoen bis wife and daughter; he sad Kleeck ung va Frost were the witnesses; | swear positively abput the wilt; this was in the summer or fall of 1369; /never noticed any disagreements between Mr. Parish And bis wite; there was a coldness after ‘Misa Hayt came; have heard Mr. Parish say be had the best woman tu the world for cooking. Crows-examimed—Wo dissolved partnership July, 1870; Mr. Partsh went to Kurope tor tho firet time about tho lat of September; we were on the most friondly terms; Mra, Parish also knew nothing of the separation ull Mr, Parish tola me; he revurned 1m January followmg; they never hved together utter; have called on Mra, Parish with my wite since then, called on ber alone on two occasions, carrylug bundies wo her trom Mrs, Frost; have assisted Mrs. Parish in this contest when asked and have met with her wit. snesses; Mr. Parish did not say that in the will be had Jeft $20,000 to Mra Parish, then this other small be- quest and the balauco to Miss Susie Hayt Parish. @ Mr, Thompson handed over three more letters, which he offered in evidence, The Court took a recess till three o'clock P. M. AFTER RECESS. Ata late hour counse! appeared in Court, and, with. out examining any more witnesses, adjouroed tll Thursday next, ‘Shere are rumors of a compromise, A BARROOM HOMICIDE. A man, named John Gleason, during a quarrel in a saloon a few weeks ago, had hia jaw fractured by a viow from one of hia antagonists. Yesterday he aicd at the Roosevelt Hospital. Two persons are arrested on suspicion of being his assailants, Early yestorday morning Coroner Elinger was notified of the death of Gleason, The Voroner pro- cceded to the place, and Deputy Coroner Goldschmidt made 4 post-mortem examination, by which he found \hat deatn had been caused by a very vad douvle frac- ture of the jaw, evitiently produced by external violence. At the hospital no account of the circum- cvs of Lhe vase could be obtained, urther investigation showed that the caso was ono of homicide, It appears that on the Sunday mentioned the deceased went into a liquor store kept by James Reilly, cn the corner of Madison and Roosevelt streets, While there he met two acquaintances, Matthew ads of No. 78 James street, and one Mortimer O'Donnell, The men began quurreliing over ther drinks, and from words came to biows A free dght ensued, during which O'Donnell sirack Gleason a ter- rible blow on the side of the tace, fracturing bis lot Jaw. O'Douvell was arrested at the ute, itentived by Gleason bejore his death struck him, He was taken to Court $4,000 bail to answer, Last night the potice of the Fourth precinct were notified of the death of Gleason. Olticer Karr was detailed to arrest McCaffrey, the com. panioo oi O'Donnell, and alleged to be one of the as Sailants. McCaflrey was locked up in the station house, awaultiog the disposition of Coroner Etlinger, O'Donbell was twken mle custody at midnight last night, by Officer Carr of the Fourth precinct, CLOSING A DEN. Acting on a warrant issued by Justico Smith, Ser geant Milor, of the Third District Court squad, oo Wednesday night raided on the premisos No. 41 Bow- ery, known as “The Bowery Hotel,” which ta classed resort for prostitutes and thieves.” 3 Robert aud Jane Burns, living 1 the house; Charles Fenton and Voter Jonnson, of No, 40 Madison street; Ferdinand Stern, of Brooklyn; Thomas Shanahan and James Martin, of No, 23 Witham street; Thomas Murray, of No, $2 'Honry street; Mary Lockwood, of No. 613 Pearl street; Mary Smith, of No. 17 Bowery, and Kate Bauman, of No. 1s Chrystie street. The com- piaine inst the place was made vy a travelling ent, ed George Fleming, who, while stoy hy the piace, was robbed of bis watch and chain in money. Von der Walbock was held for trial in de- fauit of $500 bai The wor prisoners were fined S19 each and the men $d cach, A nan mameod Be nard Breder offered himself as bail for Von aer Wal beck and was retused by Justice Smith. Breder then said, “1 wil make you take my bail,’’ and Justice Smith fined him $25 lor contompt of court, Poter Zeller, @ bartender of the place, arrested day beiore yesterday, says that ‘Fleming and a triend cailed “Yom,’’ were under the influence ot liquor when they went into the barroom, and “Tom” intrusted bis A ag to Zoller tor keoping until he shonid call tor em,