The anti-monopolist. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1874-1878, 1878-11-28


could legally take such time as was deemed
necessary to arrive at the result, but it was
finally decided to be on the safe side, to take
a recess to 7;30, and go on with the canvass.
Evening Session.
When the board reconvened for the even
ing session quite gcodly number of Repub-
lcan leaders were present, interested and
anxious witnesses of the scene. The board
called to order, Judge Flandrau proceed to
answer the objections advanced by Mr.. Gill
man as set forth in the afternoon proceed
ings. In the first place he said that the
powers of the board we're purely ministerial,
with no power to exercise judi
cial prerogatives by review of
the acts of precinct boards, but they must
take the returns as they cone before them,
and if found correct upon their face they
must be canvassed. The object of the can
vass was to arrive at the number OF votes
polled. On this point he read authorities,
including decisions Of our own courts, III
defense of his position.
Judge Flandrau then took up the objec-
tons made in their regular order. The first
objection, he said, was to Big Stone as being
an unorganized county, and that the return
Of votes polled had been
made to Douglas, also an
unorgenized county. Unorganized counties
are empowered to make returns to counties
to which they are attached for election pur
poses. Big Stone, with Douglas, Grant,
Pope and Stevens, composed the 18th legis-
lative district, and Douglas being the senior
county in the district, the returns Of Big
Stone were made to that county. Mr.. Elan
drau then read from the statutes to show
that Douglas county had been duly organ
lied by the appointment of county com mis-
sioners, with authority to appoint all other
officers included in a regular county
organization to hold their respective offices
until their successors were elect
ed and qualified. Such proceed
ing constituted organization, and that had
been fully carried out in the case of Douglas.
The supreme court decision in the case of
Big Stone, cited by opposing counsel, cover
ed an entirely different point, and dill not
apply to Douglas.
referring to the point made by Mr.. Gil
man. that Big Stone was only attached to
Douglas tor Legislative election purposes, Mr..
Flandrau said that there was no specific pro-
vision in the State law
governing elections for Congress
men, and that in consequence such elections
must be governed by the general provisions
| of law applying to State and legislative cleo
lions. and that under such construction Big
Stone was clearly attached to Douglas for
election purposes. The other counties OBJ
ected to as being unorganiZed were gov
erned by the same general principals of law,
and must be considered by the board in the
same manner.
| Judge Flandran then took mp the objec
tions to the reception of the supplementary
returns from Hennepin county. He argued
that the returns were made by the proper
officers were properly before the board, and
should be canvassed the same as the other
returns FROM that county. No charge of
fraud had been made. but simply that the
| State officers in sending out the blanks had
failed to provide space for the vote for
Congressman, by which the local canvassing
board had been led into committing AL
error by emitting that vote. Such ques-
ton carried into court. would be settled
| instanter. by going behind the returns and
ascertaining the true vote and declaring it
This board cannot 60 back OF the returns.
bat when it has the evidence OF the proper
officers before it that such . vote was legally
cast. in compliance With the Law, it IL its
duty to count such vote, notwithstanding
the fact of Irregularities.
! Taking ND the case Of Isanti county, be
said objection was made that the return WAS
not signed by the proper officers. The
county board consists Of tho auditor and two
| justices of the peace. The return received
is signed By tae auditor, justice OF the
peace and Judge of probate. According to
the statutes . majority Of the board can act
in such cases. majority did 90 act in this
case, and the fact that the judge of probsos
signed with that majority, or il say otAsg
person had 20 signed, does not viofooo - -
of the majority.
In the case of Ksnabsc ocun1g = %
jected 20 Is being unorgauizo
was organized March Is, 1878, A,tAe ane
manner - Douglas, aasd must be esfed
in the same light by ~ board.
Objection q - - Lake county for the
same ssn. = - created in
1850 - sd in 1867.
" - .D~d1 .dizsse.y organizing
- orU16 bes - q find laws
H ~ ls11l oKisosnce of the county,
] UxieA = Il t1ns = Genital for this board TO
kn0w.
| ~ - H. supplemental returns from OAR
win and Forrest City, Meeker county, to
which he had made objection. be now with
drew. believing they saouli be counted for
the reasons advanced in favor of the Yecep-
ton OF tie supplemental re.urns from Hen
nepin.
| Otter Tail COUNTY. to Which objection is
made, was organized March, 1s5S, in the
ssTss manner ~ Douglas, and the argumen.
advanced with -eference to that county sp-
giiasi here.
In TIE case OF Polk and Ki..son counties,
il l. objected ti,ss Ki.tson Is unorg.nized.
and that its return IS embodied with tia. OF
Polk, 20 which j. IS No. attached for election
purposes Kitsson vss formerly Pemb:na
county. He acknowledged it was unorxan-
izsd, and said its return should PROBABLY have
been made to the senior county IN it, leg
ss.afsve district This vas IN informslity.
nothing ne~, and ought not 70 vitiaas the re-
! turn, and II Il did, To objection vuaId nol
hold god - PHI, vhi1h vue r ~,
4 Torn, and nade y - pEuR9 o0eaA