How these wholesale frauds began-60,000

bogus naturalizations in one year. "These wholesale naturalization proceedings began in 1866, before Judge Cardoza, in the Court of Common Pleas. In 1867 they were transferred to the Superior Court, before Judge McCunn. The Court of Common Pleas had done the bulk of the naturalization business, until it was stopped by Mr. Jarvis, the clerk of the court, a Democrat, but a man of strict integrity. I have here a mass of applications (exhibiting a pile of papers) on which the clerk utterly refused to offer certificates. "In 1858 the Court of Common Pleas was neglected, and only issued 3,145 certificates, while the Superior Court issued 20,000, and the Supreme Court, for the first time in its history, was opened for purposes of naturalization. In the Superior Court there were issued in December, 1868, 26,226; in January, 1869, the deputy clerk of the court issued 27,897. In October alone 18,472 certificates were given out.

"In the Superior Court, before one judge, there were issued in fifteen days of October, 1868, according to the files of the court, 18,817 certificates. There was, as nearly as can be ascertained, an additional issue of 20,000 in the two courts, of which no records appear on the books. In 1868 there were 64,000 such naturalization papers manufactured in these courts, Dirty work in the Supreme Court-8,754 more naturalization papers issued than the Court files show.

"In the Supreme Court, before Judge Barnard, there were 18,824. In the Superior Court, during October, five judges took part in the proceedings. Judge Barber naturalized 75; Anthony M. Robinson, the same number; Samuel Jones, 1,000. From seven to eighttenths of the number were before Judge McCunn, and Judge Garvin had the remainder. All except Judges Garvin and McCunn attended to their ordinary duties during the month, and Garvin did so part of the time, doing chamber business occasionally. This total of 18,824 in the Supreme Court, is 8,754 more than appears on the files of the court for 1869, as I learn from testimony other than that given by M. Plum. Davenport begins the fight-His offer to Tammany-Results of his good work. "In 1872 and 1874 instructions were given to regard those specific cases where information was obtained relative to fraudulent naturalization papers. In 1876, I issued a notice to the supervisors to challenge peremptorily every person who appeared for the purpose of registering on the 1868 certificate. I had obtained so much information that it was my desire to give each person notice that his right to the possession of such certificate would be contested, and to place him on his guard as to their use. By 1878, I had obtained additional facts, as I desired to sustain myself, but not to act hastily. I believed that a large number of those holding such certificates had been imposed upon. I sought Mr. Kelly and proposed to him the appointment of a joint committee of Republicans and Democrats, and said that if they would work with me I would sit during the evening, in order to allow the laboring men more facilities for appearing than they would have during the daytime. And I proposed that the committee from Tammany Hall should aid me in having the holders of '68 papers appear before me in the Spring and Summer of 1878; that these fraudulent papers should be taken up, and the holders be permitted to declare their intentions where they had not declared them; and that those who had declared their intentions should obtain proper papers. Thus I wanted to save the issuing of warrants, and to prevent arrests and the complications which would arise if such action was taken at the election.

"Henry L. Clinton, of Tammany Hall, wrote to me, and subsequently a committee was appointed by Mr. Kelly's organization, namely, Luke Cozzens, Judge Quin, and Henry D. Purroy. They appointed one of their number to sit in my office during the proceedings. They sat for two or three days and then withdrew, for reasons unknown to me, although I have my views. They opened an office in Reade street, and sent out circulars printed in English and German, to all holders of papers of 1868.

[Mr. Davenport here read a copy of the circular. Its purport was to render the persons referred to suspicious of the Government's supervisors, and seemed especially to warn them against appearing before Mr. Davenport. An early call at their office was advised}. "I proceeded during the Summer with the business, and between 2,000 and 3,000 persons appeared before me, surrendered their false papers, and made affidavits as to how they obtained them. Of these 1,000 men had voted on the papers for eight years. They were considerably over age when they arrived in this country-from forty to sixty years of age-yet they were naturalized as minors, without declaring their intentions. In 1878 the number of fraudulent certificates registered was reduced to 3,197, as against 10,000 in 1876. I issued warrants for 3,100 holders of these papers, and prevented all except 1,240 from voting, and in these cases it was not my fault. Some of the 3,197 procured new papers."

Specimen Frauds – Certificates issued in blank.

"In sifting this matter I learned first that the number of applications on file nowhere nearly approached the number issued in 1868. Certificates in blank were issued, under the seal of the Court, and with the clerk's signature attached; and in 1867 the same thing was done. were so issued, he continued, they were ready to use [Mr. Davenport here showed a certificate.] Where they by filling in the names. I have in my possession blanks with one name erased by a knife, and another filled in. Later this kind of work was done with acid, and is almost impossible to detect. This practice was carried on to a considerable extent. I also learned that many certificates were issued in names of fictitious persons for whom applications were made out and filed in the court. Many of them were signed, in good handwriting, by witnesses who cannot write at the present time."

Professional false witnesses.

"Many of the persons engaged in this work were acting as standing professional witnesses. For instance: Patrick Goff was a witness for 2,162 persons, and John Moran for 1,397. Ten persons were witnesses for 8,245 applicants. In one month, as shown by the files of the Court, these witnesses, about 100 in number, made affidavits for above 20,000 people. They were, in fact permanently attached to the Courts during the naturalization proceedings, in that capacity, and for that purpose. For October, 1868, there were 37,000 applications, to which they made affidavit. They acted in both Courts on the same day.

"Patrick Goff was witness in the Supreme Court as follows: On October 9th, for 63; 10th, 325; 12th,391; 13th, 357; 14th, 114; 15th, 196; 16th, 165; 17th, 13; 19th, 72; 20th, 56; 21st, 20; 22d, 18.

"John Moran was witness as follows: October 7th, for 9; 8th, 34; 9th, 6; 10th, 29; 12th, 95; 13th, 136; 14th, 115; 15th, 30; 16th, 265; 17th, 1; 19th, 60; 20th, 51; 21st, 98; 22d, 61; 23d, 71.

"John Ward appeared for applicants as follows: In the Supreme Court, October 8th, 44; 9th, 40; 10th, 17; 12th, 136; 13th, 162; 14th, 52; 15th, 107; 16th, 29; 17th, 23; 19th, 63; 20th, 58; 21st, 46; 22d, 39; 23d, 44; and in the Superior Court, October 1st, 8; 2d, 22; 3d, 32; 5th, 17; 6th, 26; 7th, 27; 8th, 33; 9th, 15; 10th, 7; 12th, 10; 14th, 7; 15th, 4; 16th, 2; 17th, 8; 19th, 11; 20th, 2.

"Patrick McCaffery in the Superior Court made affidavits for 273 persons, and in the Supreme Court for 676. John Ward appeared for a total of 1,069 applicants. In these applications the signatures of the applicants were not there, but their names were used. The witnesses obtained the certificates in the names of the applicants, and sold the papers to them at rates varying from 50 cents to $2."

Spreading the work to other counties.

"In the Supreme Court, Goff, in one day, obtained certificates for 1,000 persous, and took to Kings County 400. Numbers were also delivered to nearly all the river counties-Westchester, Putnam, Orange, Rockland. I know of 500 that were offered in Saratoga County, in blank, to Mr. Curtis of the State Committee, at $1 apiece. I believe that a very large number of certificates were issued for which there are no records and no application on file any where in

***

court. I call the attention of the committee to the testimony before the Congressional Committee on Contested Seats in the case of Van Wyck against Green, and that from Orange and other counties before the Lawrence Committee, and to a letter written by me to County Clerk Gumbleton on October 22, 1878, asking him if any naturalizations had been made by the Supreme Court in 1866, and to Mr. Gumbleton's reply in the negative. Certificates were printed for the Supreme Court until 1868."

Not informed on history—“Standing witnesses" under criminal indictment ! "Here is a certificate in which the person who filled up the blank forgot that 1872 was not the ninety-first year of the independence of the United States, and filled up the blank as he had been accustomed to do in 1868, instead of making it the ninety-sixth year of independence. In a certificat issued to James Phelan and in two others the 6' is erased and '8' written over it. The name of Max Weinheim was not on the 66 certificate, as none were presented to the Superior Court in that year, so the Court sent another paper to his house [tossing the certificate to Senator McDonald]. I also believe that naturalization papers were given out in blanks, because I have in my possession several papers for which there is no application on file. The clerks so informed me, and I have also inspected the records.

"Many persons whom I questioned said they got their papers at the City Hall, and this was undoubtedly true. But the Court only sat two nights at that place; the papers were given out from the clerk's office. The room in the basement was occupied in October, 1868, by a large number of men sent from the different wards of the city, as standing witnesses, and the applications were filled up by them. Out of 39,000 certificates printed for the Supreme Court, only 1,862 were left when they got through, as Mr. Lowe testified upon the Lawrence Committee, and none was issued except by the clerk. From certain facts obtained I learned that certificates of naturalization were obtained at club-rooms and bar-rooms. Very many of the professional witnesses were under five or six indictments each on criminal charges, and both McCunn and Barnard, who had long been criminal judges, knew the men personally. In 1868 United States Marshal Murray, believing this work was being done, sent a number of fictitious names to the Democratic National Committee and in a few hours obtained certificates of naturalization for all, on the payment of $2.00 each. Applications were made out at Democratic headquarters, and residences were given in stone-yards and vacant lots." Making citizens for New Jersey, and Connecticut also-Whole streets naturalized from house to house-Various systems. "Nor did the Courts confine their naturalization to this and adjoining countis; they naturalized many persons from New Jersey and ther States. I know of the seizure of 3,000 certificates, contracted for regularly to be delivered in Connecticut, at 50 cents each. They were seized in a liquor store at Prince and Mercer streets by the police.

"[Mr. Davenport hero gave the names of two persons from New Jersey naturalized in New York, Peter E. Krankle, of Hoboken, and George Hooten. The latter was naturalized on a declaration form to which no declaration is attached, but which contains this peremptory order:

"Give this man his certificate.

"JOHN H. McCUNN.'"]

naturalized in the Supreme Court. In Greenwich, James, Spring, Thames, and other streets, numbers were given in excess of the houses, and Patrick Goff, as a witness for these, gave his address in thirteen different places-all No. 44.'

"Another system adopted was for two aliens to appear for each other, although the statute requires that a witness must be a citizen of the United States. Some of the standing witnesses who had appeared during the month turned up on the last day, and were themselves duly naturalized.

"[In reply to Senator McDonald's question, Mr. Davenport stated that he knew of this fact, of applicants. appearing for each other, by the indices of the Courts. These indices, he said until after arrests were made, in 1868, were simply alphabetical lists, made up months. afterward, and no pretence was made that they were anything else; as, for instance, in the Su reme Court, on February 19, 1871, the clerk had just begun to make up the indices for 1868. There was no record of these naturalization proceedings, except in these indices.]" Papers issued to those who had not even declared their intentions-The witnesses sworn in droves of 100 to 150 !-Papers sent through by mail to non-applicants! I find that many persons who held certificates of naturalization which were granted upon these applications have not, in fact, declared their intentions, and have not sworn to these applications which appeared upon the file of the Court. Others were not asked whether they had done so or not, or in regard to their age. Others came here over the age of eighteen who had declared their intentions, but yet were made to appear on file as if they had not done so. Others had made previous declarations, yet the originals which, if they had been properly naturalized, would have been returned to the Court and attached to their applications, were still in their possession. I know as a fact, from observation, that in 1868, when these witnesses to the naturalization papers were sworn, they were sworn in large companies, frequently from 100 to 150 at a time, the Bible being held in the hands of the clerk and the witnesses holding up their hands, and being sworn, as I stated yesterday, to the number of the affidavits by them signed. With regard to the professional interests, they really signed no affidavits, and therefore did not have any hesitation in taking such an oath. I also learned that papers were sent to people through the Post Office without any application on their part.

Lists of 18,824 and of 18,653 Naturalizations in two courts within twenty-three days! One Judge makes 2,543 Citizens in one day!

The Supreme Court sits ordinarily about four hours: a day. Upon two or three occasions it sat for a period of from five to six hours. The actual number purporting to be naturalized, so far as any applications now on file show in the Supreme Court, and so far as can be seen from the index in the Superior Court, is as follows:

In 1868,

In

"According to the ratio in the Courts since 1868, from 40 to 50 per cent. of the persons naturalized should have been on previous declarations of intention. out of 18,824 on file, only 400 were on declaration. the Supreme Court the ratio should be the same. Out of 25,000 only 4,000 were on declaration and discharges. In the Court of Common Pleas a large number was on declaration, made within two years. Whole streets were taken and naturalized from house to house. From one disreputable place in Green Street, forty-two persons were registered. The numbers ran as high as 348 on the register when there were but 263 in the street. In City Hall Place men were registered as high as No. 342 when there were only forty houses there. Out of forty-four houses in Vandewater street 103 men were

October 19. October 20. October 21.. October 22 October 23.

Total...

Testimony of experienced Judges that 8 or 10 persons only can be naturalized in one hour-Judge McCunn naturalizes 2 in one minute, and Judge Barnard 2,543 in 5 hours!

I call your attention to the testimony of Nathaniel Jarvis, of the Court of Common Pleas, in the year 1868. On one occasion he was in the Superior Court when naturalization was going on, and he testifies that the applicants were not allowed to be present. Also to the testimony of John R. Brady, of the Court of Common Pleas, before the Lawrence Committee, in which he expresses an opinion that men could be naturalized properly at the rate of one in every five minutes. Also to the report of the Committee on the Judiciary of the United States Senate made on January 27, and March 9, 1845, with testimony concerning violations of naturalization laws contained in the same volume. The

Judiciary Committee was empowered by the Senate to take testimony in the cities of Philadelphia, New Orleans and New York with reference to violations of the naturalization laws. The Commissioners who took testimony in this city were John C. Hamilton, John Lloyd and Alexander W. Bradford. They brought before them all the judges of the Superior Court who had been engaged in naturalization, together with the judges of the Marine Court, which at this time naturalized foreigners. Judge Hamilton, of the Marine Court, testified that, "the greatest number of naturalizations I ever found myself able to administer in a session of eight hours was, I think, eighty." All the judges, with one single exception, testified that eight or ten an hour was all they could possibly naturalize. Judge McCunn has since testified that he naturalized two a minute, but Judge Barnard must have naturalized even more rapidly, as on October 12 he naturalized 2,543 in five hours.

Many applicants born in the United States -Prominent citizens signing as witnesses with a "mark" who did not appear at all-Other illegalities.

It is well that I should call attention to the fact that those fraudulently naturalized in 1868 were made to appear as minors on the files of the Court. I also found that a great number of the applicants were born in the United States, and even in this city. I also find, Mr. Davenport continued, the names of prominent citizens as witnesses, who never appeared in court and who were not witnesses, and most of whose signatures were made with a mark. Among them are August Belmont, J. T. Hoffmann, William M. Tweed, Peter B. Sweeney, John J. Bradley, Alderman Seery, Coroner Woltman, J. S. McGowan, William H. Vanderbilt, Samuel G. Courtney, then United States District Attorney, engaged in prosecuting the frauds at that time,

and numerous others.

[Mr. Davenport then quoted legal authorities and precedents to show that two citizens were required as witnesses for naturalization, until the issue of the Revised Statutes, wherein it was declared that one witness was sufficient. He also drew attention to the fact that in many cases of naturalization in 1868 there was no renunciation of allegiance to other authority.]

Commissioner Davenport draws attention

to many other gross informalities.

Mr. Davenport proceeded to show, by a decision of Judge Pratt, that the testimony showing five years' residence must be taken in open Court by an oral examination of the witness, previously prepared affidavits not being in evidence. In these cases in 1868 no record was taken by the Court. On the minutes of the Supreme Court six names appeared during the month of October up to October 6. On the next day

Senator Blair-I can tell. Mr. Davenport, pray proceed.

Mr. Davenport quoted several authorities showing the necessity of Court decisions being recorded in naturalization cases, and said that in the Superior Court in this city the records were kept in 1844 and down to 1858, but when the naturalizations began on a large scale the clerks abandoned the custom because it was a little trouble; and not until 1872 or 1873 did they resume the practice of recording the minutes of the Court. Judge Blatchford, although expressing the opinion that where the applications were upon the files, and it had been the custom of the Court to treat these files as records, they should be treated as records, yet admitted that such records might be impeached. Senator McDonald-Who are you swearing by now? Mr. Davenport-I am speaking of Judge Blatchford. A short discussion ensued, in the course of which Senator Hoar said:

If it be true that there were some 60,000 of these naturalization papers that were void and bogus all through, that they were obtained by a mere sham, it is not necessary, perhaps, in this distance of time, to consider if there was a mistake as to the quality or character of the record. I do not think it necessary to spend his reasons. so much time on this point. Mr. Davenport has given

His opinion or action upon the illegal papers of 1868–He will act in the Presidential election of 1880 as he did in 1878. This little tilt having ended, Mr. Davenport was allowed to proceed with his citation of authorities, but in a short time Senator Blair interrupted with a question as to his opinion of the naturalization papers of 1868, in regard to which warrants had been issued.

Mr. Davenport-I believed then that they were fraudulent and void, and I still believe the same.

Senator Blair-Are there any of those papers still outstanding?

Mr. Davenport-There are, and during the coming Presidential election I intend pursuing the same course in regard to them as I did in 1878. The holders of them have received the fullest kind of notice, and I do not believe there is any voter on an 1868 paper who does not believe that the validity of this paper is questioned. Their validity was first questioned in 1868, and the holders have been frequently warned since by publication in the papers, by official notification, by challenges, by personal notices to the holders, and by the various investigations which have followed my actions.

The number naturalized in each year from 1856 to 1876 inclusive, and since.

I have here some facts in regard to naturalization from the year 1856 to 1876, as follows: Year. No. Natu- Year. No. Natu- Year. No. Naturalized. ralized. ralized. 1863.... 2,641 1870...... 4,074 1864....12,202 1865.... 7,239 1866....13,040

1856... .16,516 1857...... 8,998 1858 .... 6,975 1859...... 7,649 1860...... 3,564

1861......13,058

1871

3,528

1872....

9,965

1873..

4,197

1862.... ...... 2,417 There have been about 7,000 since, added Mr. Davenport.

Senator Blair-Have you any statistics showing the ratio of foreign population and increase of naturalized citizens?

Mr. Davenport-I have the emigration statistics from 1847 to 1876, but there is nothing to indicate what became of the immigrants.

Senator Blair-Have you read the testimony of Mr. Boese, the Clerk of the Superior Court, and have you any statement to make in regard to it?

Immigration Statistics-The State Census

of 1875 Pulled to Pieces!

Mr. Davenport-Well, he takes the State census of 1875, and tries to show that it is correct. There are no means by which they can make it correct. A committee was appointed by the Legislature, and the members went over it with me, in the office of the Secretary of State. We found that the census, so far as the population was concerned, was fair; but owing to the stupidity and carelessness of the enumerators, so far as voters and aliens were concerned, it was grossly wrong. For instance, in my own house it gives myself, my wife and three children, and three female servants, all as voters. In the house of Mr. Howard, jeweler, at Fifth ave. and Twenty-ninth st., they had all his children, wife and his servants down as voters. I instance these as individual cases, but there were many others in the Murray Hill and Fifth ave. districts. The only way in which they could correct this, which they endeavored to do, was by striking out the women and children, but then they had no means of distinguishing which of the men were aliens and which were voters, The statement gave 232,252 voters

and 141,000 aliens. In 1876 there could not have been over 194,546 voters. There are not at this time 230,000 voters in the county of New York.

The same person refers to emigration as being the reason why naturalization was larger in 1868 than before, but he entirely overlooks the fact that no person who came here after 1863 could be naturalized in 1868: and that in that year the emigration had fallen from 183,000 down to 8,000. He also says that many persons did not want to get naturalized during the years of the war, and that these came in for naturalization in 1868. To that I answer that there had not been, prior to 1866, in any year, not a Presidential year, over 9,000 persons naturalized. Both 1866 and 1867 ran up very high13,040 and 15,486-nearly double what had been the average of any Presidential year prior to that. This shows to what extent those who had neglected to naturalize in previous years increased the number of that year.

Extent of Commissioner Daven port's jurisdiction-Population of wards, etc. Senator Blair-What does your district comprise? Mr. Davenport-The district runs on both sides the river from here to Albany County, The city of New York alone had population in 1876 of 1,100,000, of which 44% per cent. are of foreign birth. Some idea of the density of the population may be obtained from the fact that one-half of the entire population was between the Battery and Fourteenth street, a territory of only 2,400 acres. The national census of 1870 showed a population in the Sixth Ward of 21,153, of which 17,128, or 81 per cent. lived in tenement houses. Of the 95,411 residents in the Seventeenth Ward, 72,344, or 70 82-100, found their homes in similar dwellings. There were only fourteen cities in the whole United States in 1875 that had a larger population than that ward.

Pertinent questions and answers as to party majorities and fraudulent naturalization-Naturalization papers in blank secreted behind a mirror in a barroom! Senator Hoar-What was the majority for the Democratic party in the State of New York in the Presidential year of 1868 ?

Mr. Davenport-The total Democratic vote was 429,883; the total Republican vote 419,883, making the Democratic majority just 10,000. The Democratic majority in this county was 60,554.

Senator Hoar-What was the number of those who voted on these fraudulent naturalization papers in your opinion

Mr. Davenport-In the neighborhood of 44.000. The others voted in various counties in this State, in the State of New Jersey, Connecticut, and in Pennsylvania, Of the number of naturalization papers actually issued in that year, only about 4,500 claimed to live outside the county of New York.

Senator McDonald-Then there were about 37,574 of those who had been naturalized, according to the re

Mr. Davenport-Who appear to have been. Senator McDonald-How many naturalization papers bearing the seal of the Court, in excess of the number upon the records of the Court, were there issued that year?

Mr. Davenport-About 18,000. The Supreme Court alone issued 39,000 certified blanks, of which 18,824 were used. Of these I have seen about 4,000 or 5,000 personally. The papers were issued in blank, with no name to them. They were not naturalization papers legally, but they were used as such. Of these blanks, with the names filled in so as to complete the certificate by which the person might register, I have seen about 100. They were seized by the police on the complaint of Republicans. They were not used, but they were given out for use.

Senator Hoar-Where were they seized?

Mr. Davenport-They were found in a bar-room secreted behind a mirror, where they were waiting for transportation to Connecticut,

Gross irregularities- Many naturalized who had not been in the country more than a few weeks.

"Mr. Davenport then mentioned that in the Supreme Court, and in the Superior Court before Judge McCunn, applicants were seldom if ever admitted to the courtroom. In the room adjoining there was another branch of the Supreme Court where Judge Barnard sat. There were during the time when the naturalization papers were issued in 1868, many professional witnesses who occupied a room connected with that in which Judge Barnard was holding court, by a green door, through which the judge, from time to time, went to laugh and jest with these professional witnesses. Papers were filled up in that room and proceedings generally were conducted in an irregular manner. They had a mock court, elected a judge and jury.

He also had in mind, he said, the fact that many persons who claimed to have been naturalized in these courts had not been in the country five years; many of them, on the contrary, only a few months, and some of them only a few weeks. He had a letter written by one Carl Kroger, who together with August Haeffner, Sternfield and Henry Beer, arrived at the port of New York, landing at Castle Gareen from the steamship Allemania from Hamburg. Kroger remained in New York, Sternfield went to Vermont, and Beer settled in West Troy. Within one month Kroger was made an American citizen, and in his delight thereat, on October 13 of the same year, he wrote Sternfield a letter, of which the following is a literal translation:

Documentary evidence as to four thousand of these illegal cases.

Mr. Davenport further said that he had also in his mind cases in which men were naturalized within three weeks after their arrival. He had had in his possession, as before stated, nearly 4,000 certificates, accompanied in all instances by affidavits of the persons to whom they referred, setting forth the various facts in regard to their not having been in this country sufficiently long legally to obtain these certificates. He called attention to the fact that instructions to supervisors, found on page 462 of the Lynde Committee tes-timony, were not issued by him, but were simply extracts from the laws which were printed on the inside of the covers of the supervisors' books. The notices given to persons to surrender these bogus naturalization papers were subsequently renewed to September 21, and afterward to October 12: and every opportunity was given for bringing in the papers before the warrants were issued or any action taken. The notices. were published in both English and German, and several thousand of the persons named were informed. personally or direct by mail.

Senator Hoar-At whose cost was this done? Mr. Davenport-It was done at my personal cost; without charge to them.

Mr. Davenport described the care taken to instruct each person how to apply for itizenship, and the various facilities provided for them when Senator Blair put a question in reference to the arrests made on the day of election.

"The number registered on these papers," replied Mr. Davenport, "as I have stated, in 1876, was 10,000. In 1878 there were 3,200. If it had not been for the advice which I find had been given to these men from the headquarters, I have before spot en of, but few, if any, of them would have so registered. Of the 3,200 who did so register in 1878, about 1,200 voted; and that any of them voted was due to the fact mainly that the marshals at the polling-places were absent a the time these persons made their appearance at the poll.

"With regard to election day, I had not been out of this building further than the Astor House for a period of forty-eight hours or more. My meals, such as I had, were served in the building here. I remained here the night previous, and went from here the following morning about 6 o'clock. I went to the court and remained there until 9 in the evening. I had requested one of the Commissioners, in order to save bringing people the entire length of the island, to sit in the neighborhood of Harlem Bridge and hold his court there. I also requested another Commissioner to sit on the other side of the Harlem River in what is known as the annexed district, to make more easy the transaction of business there. Commissioners Shields and Deuel held a court in this building and certain other Commissioners were appointed to try the cases of certain districts. That was done for the purpose of facilitating business, so as not to keep the people any longer than was necessary. Whenever, on the day of election, the persons arrested stated by themselves or through counsel that they would make no effort to vote upon these papers, they were discharged upon their own recognizances. So far as I knew they suffered no hardship, other than that of having to remain in the court-room for a few hours, and in some instances for a few moments only."

with the exception of the iron grating which prevents persons from getting out. Mr. Davenport-It is, sir. Senator Blair-Who were the persons actually confined there?

Mr. Davenport-Those who were held in default of bail, or whose bail was fixed, but who were unable to get it. They were sent from there from time to time, as from other courts, to Ludlow Street Jail. None stayed there all night.

Removal of supervisors of both political parties-The reason for removal-No complaint by Democrats of any misconduct on the part of Davenport,

Senator Blair-In 1878 you removed, or caused to be removed, a number of supervisors. For what

reason?

Mr. Davenport-Mainly for the reason that their handwriting was not good enough. I do not remember the number, but it was about eighty or ninety. Senator Blair-Of both political parties?

Mr. Davenport-Yes. There would have been no object in discharging them on partisan grounds, as the supervisors are chosen by the two parties. There was no citizen who made any complaint to me, either during registration or afterward, as to the supervisors or marshals. I issued warrants and arrested two supervisors, and they were removed for misconduct. Outside of that I know nothing of any improper acts by them. It was suggested before the Lynde Committee that several were arrested who were discharged before they came before me; I never heard of any of Senator Blair-I would like to know if there has been no local complaint whether, in this great Democratic city there has been no complaint as to the personal misconduct of Mr. Davenport?

these cases.

Mr. Davenport-I do not know, sir. I am reminded of one other thing in regard to these naturalization papers of 1868. Each political party had then, as ever since, a naturalization committee. Of the number of naturalization papers issued in that year, 2,800 persons applying came from the Republican party; the balance came from somewhere else.

*

Attempts at frauds in 1876-Arrests-An incident.

Mr. Davenport-In regard to the arrests made in 1876 I should like to state here an incident. At that time I found some attempts being made in the court, upon a small scale to naturalize men improperly, and I put officers in the courts to follow these people up. It resulted in the arrest of some eight or ten,

persons briefly held there.

Senator Blair-Will you please describe the room where they were kept, and its subdivisions?

Mr. Davenport-It is the room where all persons arrested for offenses against the United States laws in this district, and who are brought before the Commissioners here, are sent, and it is situated on the fourth floor of this building. It was not uilt by me but by the United States, for the purpose of retaining prisoners until they can be forwarded to Ludlow Street Jail.

A

Senator Blair-But describe the room.

Mr. Davenport-This slave-pen, as it has been called, is about the size of this, with iron bars dividing off

one end.

Senator Blair-What proportion of the room is for the prisoners?

Mr. Davenport-The room is 21% feet by 44 feet. The so-called cage is 21% feet by 12 feet. It takes up one end of the room.

Senator Blair-And how is the rest of the room occupied ?

Mr. Davenport-By the deputy marshals. Senator Hoar-Is there any reason why a prisoner should not be as comfortable as a deputy marshal?

Mr. Davenport-None whatever except that he cannot walk out into the hall and the deputy marshai

A. Early, had registered fifteen men, fourteen of whom he swore had resided in this country five years and in this State one year, the fact being that they had not so resided. Shortly after his incarceration an effort was made to have him pardoned, which effort I resisted by a letter to the President, dated February 19, 1877. This letter showed that the prisoner was an intelligent, educated person, and must have known that he was wilfully breaking the law. It was by that letter that the pardon was prevented, but within a few months of the time when his sentence expired I found he was walking the streets of New York, and had even visited Tarrytown. He had been sent to the Kings County Penitentiary. I made myself aware of all the facts, and believing that such a system was being carried on in that penitentiary, I made use of Early's knowledge and statement to corroborate what information I had received, and then recommended that he should be pardoned in consideration of the testimony he had given.

How the Supreme Court daily rushed through thousands of illegal citizens in 1868-That was the only year in which the Supreme Court naturalized at allThe Judge a candidate.

Mr. Davenport-Many of the applications for naturalization in 1868 did not bear the signatures of the applicants, and no witness appearing upon them was examined. I also found, on the part of applicants a great