The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1858-01-14
NEW SERIES-NO ll5
THE ~. ls""ss Co~"sy Contested Election
Case.

Ooses
We publish below tho opinion Of the
Hon. Il. Il. NILSSON, In the case Of the con.
tested election for the Office Of Judge Of Pro.
bate. 81. Louis comfy;
Al au election held on the nth day Of
October, 1887, In the county Of 81. Louis,
Minnesota, authority was conferred upon
the voters therein, BY the Constitutional
Convention, 70 vote for certain officers mcu-
toned and enumerated In tho Consultation,
among which w& the Office Of Judge Of
Probate.
The certificates Of the returns, a can.
vawssd, show that Samuel Badger. IT,. re-
ccived, for tho Office Of Judge OF Probate,
l99 votes Daniel ID. Merrill, for the same
Office. lOS votes. Mcrrsll. who received q
minority Of the votes cast for said oiiice,
ccntxts the right Of Badger 10 tho same.
and urgw the following groussls Of contest,
10 wit
lst. That Samuel Badger, jr., did not 70.
side within the Territory cf Minnesota for
six months nor for any portion Of the six
months next preceding the 9Th day Of DC.
tobcr, 1897, the date Of the election.
ID. That Samuel Badgsr, IT,. had bcon,
for sixteen months prior 10 the notice, 10
sidcnt Of Douglas county. Wisconsin, and
during part Of the six months next pre-.
ocding October 18th, 1887, the day Of tho
election. b. was holding On Office In Douglas
county, Wisconsin. ~ = citizen Of that
State.
The latter ground was not urgol upon
trial. m Il appeared that, 10 hold the Office
Of Deputy Register Of Deeds OF Douglas
county, did not necessarily require the incum.
bent 10 bc q citimn of Wisconsin. The
whole question, therefore, In issue between
tho parties, 10 Did Badger have legal res
idenoe In IT. Louis coupty, Minnesota, for
four months previous 10 Oct. IL, 1857.
Amer sitting the numerous aridavits
which were read under stipulation, on behalf
Of each party, aud selecting tbcrclrom the
legal evidence which must govern In arriving
at correct conclusion, ws have no doubt
from the weight Of evidence that Badger il
entitled 10 tbs Office.
All Of the allidayits of witnesses which
were introduced by tho contestant. attempt
TO prove tho fact Of badgers residences neg.
ntively, by stating that they never knew Of
his residing In -. Louis county, Minnesota"
but that they knew Of his being rcsidcn, Of
Wisconsin. Now, this form Of affidavit IL
the mere expression OF mn opinion IN 10 the
fact. without setting forth any good and
substantial grounds upon which tbe opinion
IL based. Some Of tho witnesses stats M q
ground ~ reason for tbeir knowIcdgc. that
he was employed In the Office Of Register Of
DEEDS Of Douglas county. Wisconsin. hold.
ing an appointment under that officer This
Ia not at al inconsistent with his being u
resident of Minnesota. st Louis IA distant
but few miles from the town of Superior,
whore ibe Office oi Register oi Dscds IL kept.
and the residents Of that county ARE passing
to and from that town daily.
The testimony on the part Of the defend
ant Is direct aud positive, la Sarte swcars
that be claimed biz residence in Minnesota.
and that he bad stayed with him nj bis house
~ November, 1856 Watrous testified 70
bis having claim and cabin in Minneso-
Ia, anil that he WIS with bin there M late
AZ September, 1855. Other witnesses testify,
too, 10 his being IN 81. isouis county about
the time of the election. aud that he always
claimed to be II resident oi Minnesota.
In the absence Of any direct and positive
testimony showing n state Of facts and cir.
cninstancss which negative concIusiycly the
residency oi Badger IN Minnesota, We 10 not
s'n how We can arrive at any otbsr result
than that be Was resident Of 81. Louis
county Ior four months previous To the
election A the testimony introduced by
the contestant may be true, and still il IL
not inconsistent with the fact oi his being
resident Of Minnesota. This result hsr-
MONIES all the testimony that has bcen in.
trfhIc1i on both sides
The opinion Of the Court is that Samuel
Badger. Jr, IL entitled To the Office Of Judge
Of Probate Of ST. Louis county, Minnesota.
X. H. NgL-os.
Judge I'd District.