The Portland daily press., 1872-01-01
The Contested Election Cases in Hancock
and Ar00sfaaix Caunfies.

The Contested Election Cases i'm Hancock
and ArOOst0Ok Counties.
So much has been said in the newspapers
about these cases that the public must be quite
well informed as to the points involved and per-
haps tired of them. The Aroostook case was
not decided because of any recent opinion of
the Supreme Court, but on principle estab-
lshed by the Court some years since in a case
submitted to it, that is whether one person has
the right to sign official documents for another
person. The Court decided that such sigma
tnre was not what the law contemplates and it
would not be legal. In two or three plantations
in Aroostook County, the returns were signed
by one person. This was not only evident on
inspection but the affidavit of the person who
signed one of them was offered in proof
In this county at first it was alleged that the
proceedings in two wards in this city were il
legal and that the votes should be thrown out.
The Supreme Court, or six of them decided that
the Governor and Council could not 90 behind
the returns, that the duties devolving upon
them were only ministerial Judges Dickerson
and Tapley took different view, and held that
they might go farther and pass upon the legal
ity or correctness of the return. But majori-
ties with Judges as with all classes of people,
rule. Some of the votes for Clerk of the
Courts, both for Mr.. Saunders and for Mr.
Murch, were returned with only the initial let
tiers of their Christian names, but the votes re-
turned for Hutson b. Saunders were more in
number than those for Isaac Y. Murch, and he
was declared elected, in accordance with the
decision that there was no going back of the
returns.
In the case of the County Commissioner
there were three or four hundred votes returned
with the name spelled so differently, from the
balance, that it changed the pronunciation of
the name. The name was spelled three differ
ent ways and all essentially different. If it is
said that the intent no doubt was to vote for
one and the same man, SO it may be said that
votes cast in Waldo county for VIM. III. Nc
Lean for Senator were intended for VIM. III.
Mcclellan but the Governor and Council de-
cided that these votes could not be counted for
Mcclellan, and they were not. In this case it
has transpired that some one had the Mclean
votes printed for the express purpose of defeat
ing Mcclellan, the persons who cast them, sup
posing at the time that they were voting the reg
ular ticket. In the case of County Commits
sIoner MIR. Gilbert e. Simpson was declared
elected. Counting all the votes cast against
MI Simpson, as for Mr.. Deasy, then the latter
leads the former less than one hundred and if
ty votes; and in the case of Clerk of the Courts,
counting all the !; Y. Murch for Isaac Y.
Murch; and all the HI. b. Saunders, for Hutson
Is. Saunders, then the former leads the latter
eleven votes.
One of the decisions referred to by the ma
Jorlty OF the Judges, is one given in 1S45 in an
swer to the question propounded by Governor
Anderson. The town clerk in making his re-
turn omitted the middle name of a candidate
voted tor, for county Office, and afterwards he
amended his return to correspond to the facts,
(the votes contained the middle name) and ask
ed that the mistake be corrected, or the amend
ed return be substituted for the first one, be-
cause the middle name was accidently omitted
both in the return and in the record The opin-
ion of Judges Whitman, Shepley and Tenney
was that the Governor and Council could not
go behind the return They say: ''The powers
conferred upon the Governor and Council are
specific and precise; and it is believed that it
would be irregular to go beyond them, or in any
manner to deviate from them. If they could
receive evidence that the certificates We're erro-
neous IN one particular, they might with equal
proprlety do so in another, and so exercise the
power OF judges of those elections generally
ahdWlthout restrictions. "-EWsWOrth American. |