Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1879-12-29

Oo0ouS2 LILO IeCOIO epoC!AoN al tAo OOAosAou-
ton, article four, part one, section FIVE, was
not made up in the presence of the select
men and in open town meeting as is
alleged in the cases of Webster, Lisbon and
other towns, especially if written memo-
randum of the persons voted for, with the
number of votes for each person against his
name, is made by thelclerk in the presence
of the selectmen, and in open town meeting;
thong not put upon the record book of the
town until after the meeting adjourned. Or
because one of the eeelctmen signing is an
alien as alleged in the case of CherryGeld,
all the other signatures being regular
in all respects. Or because
the de facto officers who sign
the returns from any cause were not legally
chosen, and were disqualified from holding
the Office. Or because the return is attested
by clerk pro tempore as in the case of
Vanceboro. Or by deputy clerk as in the
case of scarboro. Or because a second re-
turn was sent to the secretary of state differ
ing from the first in the numbers Of votes
returned for the various candidates, under
the facts of the Greenfield case.
Have the governor and council any right
to receive evidence on either of the above
points, and if 80, on which?
and council, when return states the names
of persons voted for and the number of
votes for each, and each signature is genuine,
to admit evidence aziuade as to any neglect
of town officers before town meeting to
ments of the constitution and laws?
Seventh-Is it the duty of the governor
and council, or have. they the right, to reject
ofv7rv0 Iano kh1 -h~11 bal
lots is not stated therein, as in Otterfeld and
other towns, or because the whole number
of ballots differ from the sum of votes re-
turned for the several candidates, as in the
case of Tar mington and other towns.
Eighth-Has a ballot with the names of
candidates printed in two columns instead
Of one, distinguishing mark within the
meaning of the statute 80 that it should not
be received into the ballot box? If SO re-
ceived and returned, is it the duty of the
governor and council to count it oven if a
protest with specimen ballot is annexed
and sealed up with the return by the select
men and the return made subject to the
legality Of the ballot as alleged in the case
of Skowhegan.
Ninth-Should votes returned as cast for
Jno. Burnham and John Burnam be counted
for the same or two different persons, or
votes returned for Alfred or Afford Cush-
man, or for James w. Clark or James W..
Clarke, or John T. Wallace or John r. Wal
lace, Jr.2
Tenth-If the vote of the first candidate
named in return is carried out in letters
and figures, and the votes of the three sue
ceeding candidates are indicated by ditto
marks, should the votes returned for the
last three candidates be rejected. If any
defect exists in such return is it correct
able by the records.
Eleventh-Have the governor and
council the right to reject return on the
ground that two or more of the signatures
were forged or written by one hand, merely
on an inspection of the return itself without
evidence from either of the officers purport-
ing to sign, in the case of Webster, Lis
bon, New Sharon and other towns, or have
they the right to re- jeet such returns or any
evidence submitted by one party alone
without first giving notice to the other
party and giving him the right to introduce
counter evidence, or have they the right to
act on or consider any protests, afidavits or
papers outside of the returns
unless upon point that the signatures of the
subscribing officers were not affixed with
their own hands, or have they the right t
reject any return on account of such protest,
aMdavits, or papers taken ex parte and filed
by one party without the knowledge of the
other, without first giving to such adverse
party notice and the right to introduce coun-
ter evidence.
Twelfth,-Should the returns Herewith
| annexed, from the town of Go ldsboro, be
counted for Oliver P. Bragdon, or Oliver
B. Bragdon, all other towns in the same
class being returned for Oliver P. Bragdon
Thirteenth-When the governor and
council decide that there is no return from
city or town on which Representative
can be summoned to the legislature, is il
their duty to take such steps as will insure
the voters of such city or town new cleo;
| ton, by which they can secure Representa-.
tive in the legislature? (The cases of five
| disfranchised cities are referred toy
Fourteenth-Have the governor and
council the right, and is it their duty to re-
| call any certificate of election Improperly OF
enormously issued to any Senator or Rep.
| resentative, or if they cannot recall Ger.
tidcate, have they the right, and is it thei1
duty, to issue new certificate to the person
| entitled thereto.
MORE PETITIONS.
|
tious were forwarded to Gov. Garcelon to
night, praying that he will refer all matter!
in dispute touching tie election of member:
OF the legislature to the supreme judicia
court. Bangor sent five large petitions, en-
bracing in all 5S7 names, including men il
all professions and callingss Many Demo
Gratis and yGreenbackers signed tn
petitions. Portland sends three stron{
petitions, aggregating 1876 names, EN-
embracing large proportion of prominen
names IN the city. Hon. VIM. L. Putnam
with Emery Ridlow, serd petitions Different,
worded from the others, but praying will
equal urgency that the matters in dispute b.
referred to the court. Thirteen eminen
ministers of the gospel, including Bishop
Neeley, of the Episcopal church, and Rev
Thomas Hill, ex-President of Harvard col
legs, and representatives of all churches
send similar petitions.
Augusta sends petition headed by Thos
Lombard, prominent Democrat, and signe,
by hundred and two leading citizens, in
clnding three ex-governors, Hon. JOSEPH