The Andrew County Republican. [volume] (Savannah, Mo.) 1871-1876, 1872-10-04
Thev Don.t Waut ono 70,

~S WV O04SO kIy
Of~course, the above applies to GU,
liberal ~ friends, and wal fully exem.
pliied on last Monday night, when
James Anderson, Esq, appeared before
the School Board with three able attor.
neys, for the purpose Of ~contesting the
seat Of John A.. Tyner as a member Of
that body; but, to the credi. Of Judge
Heren be it said that he kept in the
background and acted merely as eounsel
to his younger associates, Messrs. Sanders
aud Altgeld, and we are informed that
the Judge prepared all the papers ID the
case for the contestant. With these pre-
misses, we will give the proceedings ofthe
trial from notes furnished us by . gentle
man who was present during its progress.
At a little after Z o'clock the Board was
called to order by August Sehuster, and
ham election for officers for the ensuing
year was had, resulting As follows: Pres
ident, John B. Majors; Secretary, David
Rea ; Treasurer, August Schuster. These
proceedings took MI. Anderson by sur
prise, as he had stoutly commended that
he was still Chairman Of the Board, and
actually had the brazen ~efrontery to ask
the Board to allow him to sit as Chair
man, and, to use his own..language, he
"could not see the improperly Of sitting
there and putting questions, ever if it
was his own case" But the Board failed
to see it in that light, and followed the
law by allowing Nj. Tynera seal, who,
however, did not ask to taks any part in
the proceedings wherein he was interest.
ed. After the election, Mr.. Sanders
opened the case on the part Of the con-
testant, by reading the notice Of contest,
claiming that five votes cast for MI. Ty.
ner we're illegal. The answer Of the
c~ontestee denied that two Of the voters
objected to were illegal; denied that one
party alleged to have voted, had voted at
said election /; by silence admitted that
two Of those objected to were illegal
voters, and alleged that some eight OF
nine Of those voting for the contestant
were illegal and not entitled to vote.
The contestant failed to establish that
any Of those voting for eontestee were
illegal. The first name objected to by
~contestee was VIM. A. Elliot, son-in-law
Of contestant, who on oath stated that in
August,ls71, he removed his family and
q part of his household goods to Kansas,
and that he remained there till some
time in October, when he returned to
Andrew county. He also stated that he
left Andrew county with the intention
Of returning, provided he could not find
= place where he could do better. The
Board voted to count his vote as legal.
The only votes rejected were those Of G.
E. Schmitt and Erasmus Christianson, on
the part ofcontestant, and an error in the
count by the Judges was corrected, which
gave Mr.. Tyner q majority Of two Of the
legal and qualified voters. Mr.. Ander-
son appeared very angry at the result, and
behaved, as we arc informed, in q very
unbccoming manner before the Board;
and after the result became apparent to
him, attempted to get up..a quarrel with
Mr.. Greenlee, counsel for Mr.. Tyner.
We learn that Mr.. Anderson is 30 anx-
ious to look after the interests Of the
Taxpayers that he gave notice Of an ap-
peal from the decision of the Board.