Specification 13th.

BENTON COUNTY, POLK TOWNSHIP.

(Answer.)

You contestee, for answer to specification thirteen, says, that he denies that at an election held on the day provided by law in November, 1882, in the precinct of Polk Township, county of Benton, 5th Congressional district of State of Iowa, that the board of election and canvassers in said precinct failed to count and return all the votes cast for contestant, B. T. Frederick, for Representative in Congress, and denies that four, or any, votes were cast for him that were not counted and returned that should have been counted and returned for him;

Denies that four, or any, votes were cast for James Wilson, your contestee, in said precinct at said election for Representative in Congress, by persons not legally electors or voters, and were wrongfully and illegally returned to his credit.

Specification 14th.

BENTON COUNTY, TOWNSHIPS OF HARRISON, BRUCE, ECT.

(Answer.)

For answer to specification fourteen of contestant, your contestee says, that he denies that at the November election in 1882, in the following precincts in the county of Benton, to wit, Harrison Township, Bruce Township, Monroe Township, Taylor Township, Benton Township, Shellsburg Township, Eden Township, Kane Township, Union Township, Eldorado Township, Freemont Township, Florence Township, St. Clair Township, Iowa Township, Polk Township, and Leroy Township, each being an election precinct in said county, four, or any, persons who were not legally voters and electors, voted for James Wilson, your contestee, for the office of Representative in Congress, and that such votes were counted for him wrongfully;

Denies that in each of said townships more votes were counted for your contestee than were cast for him; and

Denies that fewer votes were counted for Benjamin T. Frederick in said precincts, or either of them, than were actually cast or polled for him for the office of Representative in Congress.

The 15th specification.

IOWA COUNTY.

(Answer.)

The contestee denies that at said election in Iowa County, in the townships of Cono, Washington, Lennox, Honey Creek, Iowa, Hilton, Sumner, Hartford, Amana, Marengo, Lincoln, Pilot, Troy, York, Dayton, English, Filmore, and Green, or in either of them, or in any other precinct in said county, any persons not qualified electors voted for him, and denies that any such votes were counted for him;

Denies that any more votes were counted at either of said precincts at said election for him than were cast for him; and

Denies that any number of votes fewer than contestant received were counted for him, as alleged in said specification.

The 16th specification.

TAMA COUNTY, RUCKINGHAM TOWNSHIP.

(Answer.)

The contestee denies that at said election in Tama County, in Buckingham Township, more votes were cast for the contestant than were counted and returned for him;

Denies that more votes were counted for contestee than he received;

Denies that any persons not legal voters voted for the contestee, and denies that any such votes were counted for him, as alleged in said specification.

The 17th specification.

TAMA COUNTY, TAMA, PERRY, GENESEO AND TOLEDO TOWNSHIPS.
(Answer.)

The contestee denies that at said election in the townships of Tama, Perry, Geneseo, and Toledo, or in either of them, any votes were cast for him by persons not qualified to vote; and denies that fewer votes were counted or returned for contestant in either of said precincts than were cast for him, as alleged in said specification.

The 18th specification.

TAMA COUNTY, CLARK TOWNSHIP.

(Answer.)

The contestee denies that at said election in said county, in Clark Township, more votes were counted for him than were cast for him;

Denies that any persons not qualified electors voted for him;

Denies that any fewer votes were counted for contestant than were cast for him, as alleged in said specification;

Denies that said election was illegally conducted; and

Denies that one of the judges bet or wagered money on the result of said election, or prepared spurious tickets or placed them in the ballot-box.

The 19th specification.

TAMA COUNTY, CARROLL TOWNSHIP.

(Answer.)

The contestee denies that at said election in Carroll Township, in said county, the votes cast for contestant were not counted and certified and returned;

Denies that fewer votes than were cast for contestant were counted, certified, and returned;

Denies that more votes were counted for contestee than were cast for him; Denies that the county canvassers improperly certified the returns from this township; and

Denies that the judges or clerks were not sworn.

The 20th specification.

TAMA COUNTY, HIGHLAND TOWNSHIP.
(Answer.)

The contestee denies that at said election in said county, in Highland Township, the board of canvassers returned nine or any fewer votes for the contestant than he received;

Denies that any persons not qualified electors voted for this contestee; and
Denies that any such votes were counted for him; and

Denies that any votes were cast for the contestant which were not counted for him.

The 21st specification.

LINN COUNTY.

(Answer.)

This contestee denies that at said election in Linn County, in the city of Cedar Rapids, any votes were cast for him by persons not legal voters and qualified electors, and denies that the votes of any such persons were counted for him, and denies that a smaller number of votes was counted for the contestant than he was entitled to receive;

He denies that at said election in said county, in Grant Township, any votes were cast for him by persons not legal and qualified electors, and denies that fewer votes were counted for the contestant than he was entitled to receive;

He denies that at said election in Spring Grove Township any persons not qualified electors voted for him, and denies that contestant received more votes than were counted for him;

He denies that at said election in Jackson Township any persons not qualified electors voted for him, and denies that any votes by disqualified persons were counted for him, and he denies that any fewer votes were counted for contestant than were cast for him;

He denies that in the township of Boulder, in said county, at said election, any persons not legally qualified to vote voted for him, and he denies that any fewer votes were counted and returned for the contestant than he received;

He denies that in the township of Washington, in said county, at said election, any persons who were not qualified electors voted for him, and he denies that any fewer votes were counted and returned for the contestant than were cast for him;

He denies that in the township of Otter Creek, in said county, at said election, any persons not qualified electors voted for him; denies that the board of canvassers

counted more votes for him than had been cast for him, and he denies that said board counted fewer votes for contestant than had been cast for him;

He denies that in the township of Maine and the township of Buffalo, or in either of them, in said county, at said election, any disqualified persons voted for him, and denies that more votes were counted in either for him than had been cast for him, and denies that any fewer votes in said precincts, or either of them, were counted for the contestant than he was entitled to receive;

He denies that in the townships of Monroe, Brown, and Marion, or in either of them, in said county, at said election any illegal votes were cast for him; and

He denies that the judges in said townships, or in either of them, returned fewer votes for contestant than were cast for him;

He denies that in the township of Clinton Rapids, in said county, at said election, any persons not qualified electors voted for him;

He denies that any person not a qualified elector voted for him in Linn Township, in said county, at said election; and

He denies that in the townships of Fairfax, College, Putnam, and Franklin, or either of them, or in any other precinct in said county, at said election, any person not a qualified elector voted for him; and

He denies that in either of said precincts more votes were cast for the contestant than were counted for him.

And now generally: This contestee denies each specification made in the notice of contest, to the extent that this contestee received and had counted for him any votes cast by persons not qualified electors in any of the election precincts in said Congressional district; and

He denies that the contestant did not receive and have counted for him all votes cast for him by qualified electors in any and all the election precincts in said district; and

He denies that any qualified elector who desired to vote for the contestant was prevented from doing so.

And in addition to taking issue with the notice of contest, and as grounds upon which he rests the validity of his election, he states the following:

At the election appointed by law for electing Representatives in Congress, held in the fifth Congressional district, in the State of Iowa (in November, 1882, which is the same election referred to by contestant), which district is composed of the counties of Marshall, Tama, Benton, Linn, Johnson, and Iowa, held in November, 1882, in the several voting precincts in said district, at which election both the contestant and contestee were candidates for the office of Representative in Congress from said district, there were cast in the entire district for this contestee for said office 11,791 votes; and from the returns made to the board of State canvassers, which were counted by said board, there appeared to have been cast for contestant for said office in the entire district 11,768 votes.

Yet this contestee alleges that the contestant did not receive 11,768 votes at said election in said district for said office, but he received many fewer than that number, as will appear by the following specifications:

Specification 18t.

MARSHALL COUNTY, MARSHALL TOWNSHIP.

Article 2, section 1, of the constitution of the State of Iowa provides for the qualifications of electors as follows: He shall be a male citizen of the United States, 21 years of age, a resident of the State six months, and of the county sixty days.

REGISTRY LAW.

By act of the legislature of Iowa, passed by the 12th general assembly, a registration of all qualified electors is provided for, which is found in the Code of Iowa, 1873, section 594 to section 602, and by the latter section it is made applicable to townships having a population of over six thousand inhabitants, as shown by the preceding cen

808.

The township of Marshall, in the county of Marshall, in said district and State, in which is the city of Marshalltown, the geographical limits being the same, had by the census of 1880 a population of over 6,000 inhabitants, and the registry law was in force within such township at the election before referred to in the notice of contest and herein.

It is provided in the laws of Iowa, code, section 618, with reference to the registry of electors and the general election, that "No votes shall be received from any person whose name does not appear there unless he shall furnish the judges his affidavit showing that he is a qualified elector, and a sufficient reason for not appearing before the board on the day for correcting the register, and shall also prove by one freeH. Mis. 22–

-2

holder or householder, whose name is on the register, that such affiant knows him to be a resident of that election precinct."

The affidavits are required to be kept by the judges and filed in the office of the clerk of the township.

The township of Marshall aforesaid is divided into four election precincts, corresponding with the wards of the city, and known and designated as the first, second, third, and fourth wards in the city, and a registry of voters was kept therein.

THE FIRST WARD.

This contestee avers that within the voting precinct known as the first ward, within said township, city, county, and district, there were cast at said election, by twentyfive persons whose names were not upon the register and who did not make nor produce the affidavits before referred to, and who were not qualified electors within said precinct, ballots for the contestant as a candidate for the office of Representative in Congress from this district to the number of twenty-five which were wrongfully counted and returned for contestant, and at said election within said precinct there were ballots cast and counted for contestant by persons not qualified electors to the number of twenty, and which should be deducted from the number of votes cast for contestant as a candidate for said office, as shown by the action of the board of State

canvassers.

THE SECOND WARD.

He further avers that within the voting precinct known as the second ward, within said city, county, and district, there were cast at said election, by fifty persons whose names were not upon the register, and who did not make or present the affidavits before referred to, and who were not qualified electors within said precinct, ballots for the contestant as a candidate for Representative in Congress from this district to the number of fifty, which were wrongfully counted and returned for contestant, and at said election within said precinct there were ballots cast and counted for contestant as a candidate for Representative in Congress from said district by persons not qualified electors to the number of fifty, and which should be deducted from the number of votes cast for contestant as a candidate for said office, as shown by the action of the State board of canvassers.

THE THIRD WARD.

He further avers that within the voting precinct known as the third ward, within said city, county, and district, there were cast at said election, by sixty persons whose names were not upon the register, and who did not make or present the affidavits before referred to, and who were not qualified electors within said precinct, ballots for the contestant as a candidate for Representative in Congress from the said district to the number of sixty, which were wrongfully counted and returned for contestant, and at said election, within said precinct, there were ballots cast and counted for contestant as a candidate for Representative, as aforesaid, by persons not qualified electors to the number of sixty, and which should be deducted from the number of votes cast for contestant as a candidate for said office, as shown by the action of the State board of canvassers.

THE FOURTH WARD.

He further avers that within the voting precinct known as the fourth ward, within said county and district, there were cast at said election, by one hundred persons whose names were not upon the register, and who did not make or present the affidavits before referred to, and who were not qualified electors within said precinct, ballots for the contestant as a candidate for Representative in Congress from the said district to the number of one hundred, which were wrongfully counted and returned for contestant, and at said election, within said precinct, there were ballots cast for and counted for contestant as a candidate for Representative in Congress from said district by persons not qualified electors to the number of one hundred, and which should be deducted from the number of votes cast for contestant as a candidate for said office, as shown by the action of the State board of canvassers.

Specification 2nd.

TAYLOR TOWNSHIP.

He further avers that at said election in said county of Marshall, in a voting precinct known as Taylor Township, in said district, the contestant caused tickets to be circulated to be used as ballots by electors, with the name of contestant printed thereon, and represented them to be ballots for the contestee, as a candidate for the office

of Representative in Congress, and by such representation caused three electors who intended to vote for this contestee, unsuspecting the imposition, to vote for the contestant by using such printed tickets as ballots, supposing them to contain the name of this contestee as a candidate for that office, which ballots were counted and returned for the contestant, and should now be deducted from the number of votes cast for contestant, as shown by the return of the township. And at said election in said last-named precinct, there were cast for this contestee, as a candidate for Representative in Congress from said district, forty-eight ballots by forty-eight qualified electors within said precinct, which ballots should be counted for him.

Specification 3rd.

JEFFERSON TOWNSHIP.

He further avers that at said election, at the voting precinct in Jefferson Township, in said county and district, three persons not qualified electors or voters and not entitled to vote in said precinct, did illegally vote and cast their ballots for the contestant for Representative in Congress from the district aforesaid, and said ballots were by the judges of election received and counted and returned for said contestant.

Specification 4th.

IOWA TOWNSHIP.

He further avers that at said election, at the voting precinct in Iowa Township, in said county and district, three persons not qualified electors and not entitled to vote in said precinct, did illegally vote and cast their ballots for the contestant for Representative in Congress from the district aforesaid, and said ballots were by the judges of election received and counted and returned for the contestant.

He further avers that at said election in said last-named precinct, the contestant caused tickets to be circulated, to be used as ballots by electors, with the name of contestant printed thereon, and represented them to be ballots for the contestee as a candidate for the office of Representative in Congress, and by such representations caused six electors who intended to vote for this contestee, not suspecting the imposition, to vote for the contestant by using such printed tickets as ballots, supposing them to contain the name of this contestee as a candidate for that office, which ballots were counted and returned for the contestant.

Specification 5th.

LIBERTY, STATE CENTER, LE GRAND, AND GREENCASTLE.

He further avers that at said election, at the voting precincts of Liberty Township, Le Grand Township, State Center Township, and Greencastle Township, in said county and district, being voting precincts therein, and in each of said precincts, ten persons not qualified electors in said precincts, or in either of them, and not entitled to vote in either of them, did illegally vote and cast their ballots for the contestant for Representative in Congress from the district aforesaid, and said ballots were by the judges of election received and counted and returned for the contestant in each of said precincts.

Specification 6th.

LISCOMB, LOGAN, WASHINGTON, MARIETTA, LINN, MINERVA, EDEN, MARION, TIMBER CREEK, BANGOR, AND VIENNA.

He further avers that at said election in the township of Liscomb, in the township of Logan, in the township of Washington, in the township of Marietta, in the township of Linn, in the township of Minerva, in the township of Eden, in the township of Marion, in the township of Timber Creek, in the township of Bangor, and in the township of Vienna, and in each of them, they and each of them being voting precincts in the county of Marshall, in the fifth Congressional district of the State of Iowa, five persons in each of said precincts, who were not qualified electors, and not qualified or legal voters within the precinct where they offered their ballots, did illegally vote and cast their ballots for the contestant for Representative in Congress from said district, and said ballots were, by the judges of election, received and counted and returned for the contestant in each of said precincts.