Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1870-02-11
MINE LEGISLATURE.
distract of the Remarks OF Mr.. EOse OF
'"'''"'' Win.erp0rt,

Win.erpOFts
r.r.or ,o .,bstituta tie mi,,,ri,,
IN motion VI the Commttee on Elections for the ma
iory report, in the ease e. Peter Ghas keeg en-
Is Mm p cs VI, IN ma di o, of n'ai nc
AIi'h'' ''' '''' GUS
Mn. SPEAKER. Up 10 tne time the genus
man from Augusta Mt, baker1 rose 70 ."Ne
part IN TINS discusslon' h"o t'hcn VI. Wy
little interest IN TINS matter: 1 ma" no' Eau
II single paper connected WIN ''o N"oN; mo-
examined the provisions ''c laws
10 the organizations OF piah'a.iohS' wv """
any special interest on one sue Ut ,'c "'nci'
than as member OF TINS House. whose uuy
1T would he to vote upon the one sioe OF INC
other as my convictions Oh my uu'y "nuV. NY
oath OF Office should dlrec'' whicn co"'i ''i" vi
| expected TO receive from the lac'S AM, anu .'e
law developed by the discussion. WIN 'ne
sitting member, the gentleman from Foft
Kent, or his conteStant, Mf' hecgfl' ~ lar
as this question goes have no Nn!pat'!
both alike to me are strangers. 'hpFelnaiceu
and unbiased | enter INTO TINS discussion,
seeking oniyto learn tile simple iac's anu 'iie
law and express to TINS House my CONCLUSIONS
from these facts, winch VIII Dc All the reason
can give for my vote. But when the gen
tleman from Augusta rose, and dld not know
up to that time that he was to speak on TINS
question. nor what has views were upon H.
immediately put myself In the position OF an
attentive listener, knowing fuil wen from my
past acquaintance with that gentleman that II
he started with correct premises he wound
clearly ana carefully unravei the mysteries
and technicalities OF what seemed TO us
difficult puzzle, and bring us with HIM to an
irresistible conclusion. And well knew,
too, that if his premises should be incorrect
we should be unconsciousfy led by his logic
and his eloquence to an erroneous conclusion
and one we should at some future time, after
more mature reflection. regret. Therefore
say listened with critics ear, and after
wards sought with students care, 1or the
authorities he cited and the facts he alleged
in stating his premises, so that if he had
erred might be able to detect and expose
that error and the taliacy OF his reasoning.
as, l believe, and every other member OF
this House is bound to do. Yet, Mr.. Speaker,
with all due respect for the gentleman as an
older man than myself for his legal attain
ments, the reputation OF which are not bound
ed by county lines, for the soundness OF his
logic and his enhancing eioquence, am com
PEELED to say that ms premises were incorrect,
his reasoning therefore fallaclous ana ms CON
ciuslons wrong Aha' DIT. speaker aio
not have confidence enough IN myself to be-
heve could prove II would be the last man
ON this floor to attempt 1t.
Now, Mr.. Speaker, how stands this case!
The parties in this case have been before the
Committee ON Elections. and have had, as we
suppose, full and impartial hearing; that
committee have reported to TINS House two
reports, one III favor OF the sitting member,
signed by majority OF that committee, ana
the other signed by the minority III 1a'or OF
the contestant. The majority report having
precedence the motion now pending is that
the minority report DE substituted Tor the ma
Jority report, winch, II 1t prevails, VIII scat
the contestant, Mr.. heegan.
Now, then, what are the facts in the report!
and take TIE reports as setting 1orth all the
facts Ihese-I nat there are tour lncorpor-
ated towns IN the Madawaska Representative
District, viz: Fort Kent, DlckeyvIile, NADIA
waska and Grant Isle, which cast for Repre-
sentative at the last September election, 33l
votes, 261 OF when were for Peter Charles
heegan ana 2ol lor WIN. Dickey, thereby
elecflng keegan by Z majority; that these
votes should all be counted is admitted by
both reports. ihere were other places IN
that district called by the name OF organized
plantations, which voted last tall, casting IN
ali 90 votes, l'3 OF whlch were 1or heegan
and IIo Tor Mr. Dickey, a majority OF for
keegan, winch, addedto the majority IN the
TOUR towns just named, gives Aeegan 10 ma
Jorlty.
Now, why did not MIR. kecgan receive his
credentials and take his seat in this House
or an answer Will read from tho majority
report, I'd page, "a section.
We learn from this that the votes of Cyr
were rejected LIST, because there was no evil
dence OF ITS organization, and I'd, no ofhcial
return OF ITS votes as required by the Statutes,
were made to the Secretary OF States Office
From the minority report we find that Cyr
cast 81 votes, ~ OF which were for MIR. kee-
gan anu one ior Mr. Dlckey, as heegan with
Cyr haa 10 MAJORITY without II Mr.. Dickey
ma II majority ana mat IS the explanation.
The vi votes cast IN Cyr Plantation were not
counted tor reasons found In the myorltys
report.
Now let us look for moment at the report
OF the minority, and learn why Mr.. keegan
as entitled to his seat. breads from minorty's
report, first page, and resolve on Sd page.)
Neither report suggests fraud, but both set
up noncompliance with the Statutes Then,
Mr. Speaker, to the Statutes we must go for
the solution OF our difficulty, and we must de-
eide either to hold all alike amenable to the
strict letter OF the law, or adopt the other
democratic to letter, that in all
cases free from fraud effect shonld be given
to the choice OF the people as manifested at
the ballot Dox, Whatever II may be, regardless