ony and other women, and
receiving their votes.

The Rochester _Evening Express_ of Feb. 26, 1874, said:

TYRANNY IN ROCHESTER.--The arrest and imprisonment in our city
jail of the Election Inspectors who received the votes of Susan
B. Anthony and other ladies, at the polls of the Eighth Ward,
some months ago, is a petty but malicious act of tyranny, of
which the officers who are responsible for it will yet be
ashamed. It should be known to the public that these young men
received Miss Anthony's vote by the advice of the best legal
talent that could be procured. The ladies themselves took oath
that they were citizens of the United States and entitled to
vote.... The Court, however, fined these inspectors $25 and
costs, for an offense which at the worst is merely technical, and
now, nearly nine months after conviction, in default of payment,
they are seized and shut up in jail, away from their families and
their business, and subjected to all the inconvenience to say
nothing of the odium of such an incarceration. This is an outrage
which ought not to be tolerated in this country, and we shall be
disappointed if public sentiment does not yet rebuke, in
thunder-tones, the authorities who have perpetrated it. Miss
Anthony is willing to fight her own battles and take the
consequences, but she naturally feels indignant that others
should suffer in this matter through no fault of their own....

The Rochester _Democrat and Chronicle_ of March 26th, said:

AN OUTRAGE.--.... We regard this action on the part of District
Attorney Crowley as an outrage, in that these young men, who, at
the worst, are but accessories in the violation of law, are made
to feel its terrors, while the chief criminal is allowed to defy
the law with impunity. No effort has been made to satisfy the
judgment of the court against Miss Anthony. She contemns the law
which adjudged her guilty, and its duly appointed administrators
are either too timid or too negligent of duty to endeavor to
enforce it.... It is doubtful whether they had the right to
refuse those votes. In any event their offense is venial as
compared with hers. It does not look well for the District
Attorney thus to proceed against the lesser offenders, while the
chief offender snaps her fingers at the law, and dares i