Mr. Fox. Yes. You say that, Mr. Kelly. It is with different emotions that I recall it.

Mr. KELLY. That was the Renshaw election.

Mr. Fox. Not all of the ballots in that box were of that kind. That was one of the smaller divisions. That was where 300 votes were cast, perhaps. There were only 25 or 30 of these unfolded ballots. Of course there were a great many other circumstances in that division. For example, the election officers were ingenuous enough to have the voters voting list in alphabetical order. According to that, the voters from that particular division appeared alphabetically to vote.

The CHAIRMAN. When a man comes in to vote, under your law is it the duty of one of the judges or the clerks, then and there to write his name in a book?

Mr. Fox. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Is this correct, that those names should be recorded in the exact order of the voting?

Mr. Fox. That is correct.

The CHAIRMAN. And you say that there were a great number of names that appeared alphabetically?

Mr. Fox. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. That is to say, the A's would be together and the B's would be together?

Mr. Fox. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. The only way that could happen if the record was made correctly would be that all of the A's came in together and that all of the B's came in together, and they voted in that way. Is that correct?

Mr. Fox. That is correct. I tried to convince the jury that a coincidence like that was nothing short of a miracle, but I regret to say that I failed. They seemed to accept that as a normal situation in life, that people would vote in that way. In the first trial of that case I believe the jury was out for about 12 or 14 hours. They disagreed and were discharged.

Mr. KELLY. It was 11 to 1 for acquittal, was it not?

Mr. Fox. I do not think so. You have different information from mine on that point.

The CHAIRMAN. I suggest, Mr. Kelly, that you do not interject remarks.

Mr. Fox. In the second trial, with some of the steam having gone out of the case, I think Mr. Kelly's eloquence prevailed and they were acquitted. That was the case that exemplified the reason that I felt it was well when any of those leaders came to see me to discuss the case, that we discuss it with them. In the first of those cases that we tried I persisted against my better judgment in pressing for the conviction of all, and leaving the jury to decide the matter. I have since concluded that the trial of election cases is such an extraordinarily difficult matter that I had better take out of the hands of the jury too much leeway for their common sense, and I myself took the initiative in withdrawing by the process of nolle-pros any whom I felt should not or could not be convicted. In this particular case that I refer to, where the evidence was very strong, there was an acquittal, I am convinced, because there were certain of the defendants against whom we should have entered a nolle-pros at the very

outset. I recall the case of a boy who was an election officer either before he was 21 or a few days after he was 21. And I think Mr. Kelly, probably, in stressing the inhumanity of the Commonwealth in proceeding against him, was able to assist the older and more sophisticated officers by reason of this boy's innocence.

Senator KING. I want to ask a question there that may not be germane. Why do they resort to frauds in election matters there and in registration when there is so much unanimity? It seems to me that they vote all the same way, and what is the good of resorting to fraud, to get tombstones registered and to vote dead men and all that sort of thing? The elections are practically unanimous. What is the advantage? Why do they do it?

Mr. Fox. Merely as an interested student of human affairs, and not as one who knows a great deal about politics, it is difficult for me to answer that. Perhaps I can tell you one of the earliest cases I remember, when there was no contest at all. It was amazing to me that anyone should have taken the trouble to have made a fraudulent return, and yet in one case that I have in mind a court official, a tipstaff of a court, who is also a member of the ward committee, said to the election officers, producing a pack of cards, "Now, you boys play a game of pinochle, and I am old and more experienced than you, and I will average up this vote,' It was a case where there was an unusually long ballot, and he averaged the vote for these other men. There was no rhyme or reason for doing that, so far as any contest was concerned. You ask why it is done?

Šenator KING. It is a matter of habit, I suppose?

Mr. Fox. I think largely a habit, and also a very selfish reason, that the division leader or the lieutenant, whoever he may be, wants to see a fine return, over and against his going to the ward leader or even a higher boss and demanding some better city position.

The CHAIRMAN. He wants to demonstrate his usefulness and capacity?

Mr. Fox. Yes; and to show how indispensable he is over and against the time when the contest is closer.

The CHAIRMAN. Is that situation pretty general over there?

Mr. Fox. I should say so.

The CHAIRMAN. And has been for a number of years?

Mr. Fox. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. And it is the same organization there now as in the past, except as there have been changes in the personnel from time to time?

Mr. Fox. There is an organization which has had mutations of personnel over a number of years.

The CHAIRMAN. It is the same organization but the individuals have been changing from time to time. Is that right?

Mr. Fox. That is right; or the object has changed.

The CHAIRMAN. And these conditions have existed for many years, ever since you have been connected with the prosecution?

Mr. Fox. I can say for longer than that, because prior to my being a member of the bar I happened to be a newspaper man, and was connected with the newspaper that was very much interested in city elections, so that I had some personal contact at that time.

The CHAIRMAN. Did you make investigations at that time? Of the conditions?

Mr. Fox. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. And as a result of all that experience you say that these conditions that you have been describing have been general in the city of Philadelphia for many years?

Mr. Fox. I think so.

The CHAIRMAN. And have been generally conducted by the same organization, although the members of that organization may have changed in part from time to time?

Mr. Fox. Yes.

Mr. CLAPP. You spoke about the sticker campaign a little while ago. Did the ward leaders have any connection with that? I am referring to the campaign wherein Judge Patterson was the nominee and was dying on the day of election.

Mr. Fox. What is the question?

Mr. CLAPP. Did the ward leaders have any activity in connection with the use of stickers then, so far as it developed?

Mr. Fox. On the afternoon of the election at which the late Judge Patterson was the nominee for district attorney, a report reached the district attorney's office that stickers were being placed upon the ballots, in view of the certainty that he could not live out the day, for a man named Shoyer. I was instructed by the district attorney the day after election to conduct an investigation into the situation of what was called the sticker campaign. He directed me to find out at whose instance the stickers were printed, and the circumstances of their being distributed. I never learned at whose instance they were printed. I sent for the leaders in a number of the wards, acting under Mr. Rotan's instructions, and told them that there was a possibility of a grand jury investigation, and I asked them to tell me informally what they knew about it. A number of them told me that on the afternoon of the general election they had been summoned to the headquarters of the Republican city committee and had been given sacks and were told that they contained stickers bearing the name of Frederick J. Shoyer, and that after 3 o'clock, as I recall, unless they got word to the contrary, they were to begin to put the stickers on the ballot in place of Judge Patterson's name. I suppose four or five ward leaders were summoned to the office and that was the extent of my investigation of that. Growing out of that, one arrest was caused in the so-called sticker campaign. The district attorney's office took the initiative. I swore out a warrant against a man named Pennock, who was a police magistrate and leader in the thirty-fourth ward. I forget the technical charge on which he was indicted, but the facts were that we charged that he had directed the election officers to discontinue the issuance of ballots until they, the election officers, pasted the stickers on the ballots and gave them out to the voters with the stickers pasted on. He was tried and acquitted.

Mr. CLAPP. To do that would be to substitute a nominee of the election officers for the nominee selected by the primaries.

Mr. Fox. In plain English it would be that the election officers were marking the ballots for the voters.

The CHAIRMAN. And that would be against the law of Pennsylvania?

Mr. Fox. Oh, yes. Stickers may be employed legitimately. Stickers are recognized under the law. The voter must go to the

judge of the election and ask for a ballot, and then ask for a sticker, and he must superimpose it.

Mr. CLAPP. While you were district attorney, were there reported to you any instances of pressure being exerted on complainants and witnesses in election cases?

Mr. Fox. That is a pretty broad question. May I give several instances in connection with the very last election?

Mr. CLAPP. Yes.

Mr. Fox. In which I was one of the victims, so to speak.

Mr. CLAPP. Go ahead.

Mr. Fox. We had two cases where complaints came from the same ward downtown, the Thirty-ninth ward. In one case the charge was that under the new voters' assistance act, a small coterie of men connected with the division headquarters were voting practically all of the voters, were going into the booths with them and forcing them to accept their assistance to mark their ballots. We had complaints in that division from perhaps a dozen different sources, not related, which led me to believe that the complaints were well foun-led. I sent a number of my district attorney's detectives there, and they gathered a number of witnesses. Two of them were particularly intelligent and presented the case to me on the basis of which I was about to issue an arrest. When they came to me, they told me that they would refuse to testify, that they would go back on the affidavit which I had drawn up and which they had never signed, because they had been served with notice that if they prosecuted, they would be run out of the ward and their business would be boycotted in the ward. We abandoned that case. There was another case in another division of the Thirty-ninth ward, but I forget what the charge was. It did not have to do with illegal assistance, but I think it had to do with. chain ballots.

The CHAIRMAN. Chain ballots?

Mr. Fox. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. What is a chain ballot?

Mr. Fox. An original ballot, so the prosecutor told me, had been procured in some way by the division leader. He stood outside and marked the ballot as he thought it should be marked, and he gave it to the voter who went into the booth with his own ballot that he had been given by the judge of the election, folded that and put it in his pocket, deposited the ballot that had been marked for him, and then brought out the original ballot to the man outside who marked it in turn for another voter. This man, a little merchant down there, stated that he had observed that being done I think he said in 35 or 40 cases. I drew up an affidavit for him, and he gave me the list of the people who had been helped in that way. About 12 o'clock that night his wife called me on the phone and weepingly told me that I must keep her husband from testifying in that case or swearing out a warrant, because he had been visited since the time he had been at my office I had him come to my private office because I felt he would not want to come to the district attorney's office between the time he had come to my private office and the time that he had gone back to his home he had been visited by a dozen different people, who had threatened that he would be put out of business there, and I never could get anything further in that case. They are the only two cases I recall at the moment.

The CHAIRMAN. Let me see if I understand. That plan involves this. In some way a regular ballot is first secured, and the fixer outside marks the ballot and gives it to a voter, who carries it with him into the voting place. There he secures from the judges the ballot which he ought to cast. That is correct, is it?

Mr. Fox. That is correct.

The CHAIRMAN. Then, instead of casting the ballot which the judges gave him, he casts the ballot which the fixer gave him, and holds up the ballot which the judges gave him, and takes that out and gives it to the fixer?

Mr. Fox. That is correct.

The CHAIRMAN. Then the fixer marks that ballot and gives it to the next voter that he is doing business with, and so the operation is proceeded with, and that is what you call chain voting

Mr. Fox. That is correct.

The CHAIRMAN. Has that been common over there in Philadelphia, can you say from your own knowledge and information?

Mr. Fox. I could not say that except by merely hearing of it as the vernacular, because I have never prosecuted any individual charged with that offense. All the cases I have had to do with so far as illegal assistance is concerned were when they went right into the booth with the men. I can not say whether that is common or not. I can say that I have heard it is common.

The CHAIRMAN. Is it a matter of common general rumor and understanding, and has it been for years over there, that thats ystem has been employed, so that it has acquired the name of the chain ballot?

Mr. Fox. I should say so, yes.

Mr. CLAPP. While you were district attorney there were county detectives at your disposal, were there not?

Mr. Fox. Plenty of them.

Mr. CLAPP. Did you ever use them in investigating election cases? Mr. Fox. Yes, from time to time.

Mr. CLAPP. Did they report any obstacles to the conduct of their investigation, and, if so, what was the nature of them?

Mr. Fox. They never reported any special cooperation, and to that extent the reverse of that might be true. I think the real opposition they had was in the sticker campaign investigation; in some way, I presume because I had sent for the ward leaders in the first instance and talked with them frankly, and they naturally drew the conclusion that we would investigate conditions in the ward, because of or in spite of what they had told or had not told me. I employed the method of turning loose practically all of the county detectives in one ward as quickly as possible, so as not to give notice in that ward of what we were about. We got nowhere in any ward of the city of Philadelphia except the Thirty-fourth. The largest up-town ward in the city of Philadelphia I suppose is the twenty-second. It is very large geographically, and it is large in the number of divisions. I think there are some eighty-odd divisions there. If this answers your question, I can say that some of the detectives reported to me that when they went to one of the divisions to make an investigation and then passed on to a neighboring division, the election officers knew of their coming into that other division, for it had been announced in advance of their coming. I recall one rather humorous