Worcester daily spy., 1860-12-01


Whole number of votes, so
Necessary to a choice, 90
George NJ. Rice had 81
Stephen Salisbury, 43
w. a. Williams, 3
p. w. TAFT,
Eli Thayer,
George NJ. Rice, Esq, having received
majority of the votes cast, was declared the
nominee and ON motion OF w. A. Williams,
Esq, the nomination was made unanimous.
TWAS then voted that the convention should
proceed to nominate candidates for aldermen
by ballot, and that candidates for nomination
should be presented by the delegates from
each ward and recess OF five minutes was
allowed to ena5le the several ward delegations
to meet for that purpose, excepting those
among whom candidates had already been
agreed on.
The convention being again called to order,
proceed to ballot for candidate for alderman
for Ward l. The name of DR.. Merrick Bemls
was presented by the delegation from that
ward, and the ballot resulted as tollows:-
Merrick Bemis "a, scattering l.
llG utlCS dtibH nun " atN IlNSShtNN '''S
name OF Draper Ruggles, and the balloting
for a candidate resulted thus Draper Rug
gles 62, C. l.. Knowlton 8, scattering 3.
The delegation from Ward presented the
name of Samuel f. Gates, and the ballot was
taken with the following result:-Samuel L.
Gates Y, scattering 5.
The delegation from Ward proposed the
name OF Edward Kendall, and the ballot Tor
candidate for this ward resulted as follows =
Edward Kendall SO, Francis Harrington s, and
scattering 3.
The delegation from Ward presented the
name OF Henry Goddard, and the ballot being
taken, the result was his nomination by the
following vote Henry Goddard 81, scatter
ing 8.
The delegation from Ward presented two
names, to wit, John c. Mason and II. n. Tow
er. The baoting for candidate for this
ward resulted as follows John c. Mason 50,
IL. n Tower 20, scattering 5.
The delegation from Ward 8 proposed the
name OF John w. Wetherell, and he was nom-
mated by the following vote John w.
Wetherell SO, Richard Ball y, scattering H.
Ward was called in the regular ORDER but
we mention it last because six ballots were
taken before the nomination was made. In
each of the other cases but one ballot was nee
est&ry. The delegation from Ward pre-
sented the name OF Samuel Perry. The
first ballot stood as follows San uel Perry
40, 5. V. Stone SO, scattering II. On
The second ballot, Samuel Perry had
Al, s. V. Stone Al, and there were a few scat
tering. Third ballot Samuel Perry had 46,
S. V. Stone 43, Scattering 5 or 6. Fourth bal.
lot :-Samuel Perry 81, S. V. Stone AZ, scat.
tering 6. Fifth ballot Whole number of
votes l08, more more than the whole number
Of delegates in full conventon and S. V.
Stone had So, Samuel Perry 46 scattering T.
Mr.. Stone, having a majority, arose and
said lie would not accept the nomination made
by this ballot, and he moved that the names of
the delegates be called by the president, and
that each delegate 90 forward and vote as his
name should be called. a vote was taken de-
claring the fifth ballot null and void, after
which the motion OF Mr.. Stone was adopted.
A ballot wis then taken in accordance with
this motion, and it resulted in the nomination
of Samuel Perry, as follows Whole number
of votes So, of which Samuel Perry had 46
S. V. Stone 36, and scattering g.
The candidates Tor mayor and aldermen
being all nominated, the complete ticket stood
as follows -