The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1879-12-29

Ex-Gov. Chamberlain Urges the Accept
ance of the Morrill, Plan.
AUGUSTA. Dec. 27-The following is Hon.
Lot M. MorrilPs reply to Gov. Garcelon:
AUGUSTA, Dec. 81, 1879
| To His ErceLlency AtOnzo GGrcetOn, Governor OF
acknowledge the receipt. OF your Exce,lency's
letter of the 18th inst, which reached me yester-
day. Your Excellency will of course perceive that
it quite foreign to the purpose of my correspon-
dence discuss the justice or injustice OF the great
excitement which now menaces the peace of the
State Your Excellency agrees with me that the
excitement exists and also thai il is highly desira Bile
to allay it by means and measures which are alike
honorable to all parties.
1t is nv purpose to confne the discussion to those
points which essential and on which we may
reach an agreement, and may therefore wisely
avoid those which are non-essential and on which
we might differ. To come directly to that part of
your Excellencys communication which relates to
the points to be submitted to the judgment of the
court have to suggest the questions on the en-
closed memorandum.
Your Excellency will observe that these questions
though numerous are simple, requiring but brief
answers and not calling for elaborate opinions AS
your Excelency acquiesces in the propriety of set
Ting all disputed points in this order by just and
constitutional manner / beg to suggest in answer
to objections which l. have seen elsewhere urged
that there is abundant time for the court to con-
slider the subject. The court can readily convene
at the capital on Wednesday next or by Tuesday if
necessary, and the questions can be placed before
them on either day
AS it has not been the habit of the court to hear
arguments questions submitted by the Governor
there would be little doubt that by Friday, JAN I'd
you Excellency would receive the answer of the
court to all the questions. Even should the court
consume a day more that have supposed necessary
there would still be four full days left before the
assembling of the legislature.
When your Excellency asks me to indicate the
points that have not already been adjudicated
reply that such attempt would be valuleess and
indeed foreign to the whole scope and purpose of
this peaceful mode of adjustment
Your Excellency must be aware that there is
,,ft N
what has been adjudcated by the court as there is
touching that which has been enacted by the Legis-
lature.
Your Excellency will readily admit that the
court is best able to determine what has already
been adjudicated, and with the strong tendency of
the judicial mind to adhere to one of its own max
inns, as standing by that which has been decided,
there is no danger that your Excellencys decision
will not have the full advantage OF any opinions
heretofore pronounced by that eminent judicial
tribunal
cannot close without urging upon your Excel
lency the propriety of going forward in the course
which in your communication you have indicated
your willingness to adopt.
1t has never in the history of our State happened
to any of its chief magistrates to have it in his pow
er do much for the peace and good order OF So
ciety your Excelency enjoys to-day
The submission of these questions to the court
will instantly alay strife, preserve ORDER and re-
Can your Excellency give the people any assur-
ance of what may happen should this constitutional
mode of adjustment be rejected and the attempt
made to organize the Legislature by force on basis
OF membership WHICH so large q proportion OIL ln6
people of Maine believe to be contrary to the actual
result of the election? will not permit myself to
doubt that with the two courses before your Excel
lency, one of absolute and honorable peace the
other of possible violence and dangerous disorder,
your Excellency will promptly choose and steadily
adhere to the former And in the belief, beg to
Very respectfully yours,
[Signed1 LOT NJ. MORRILL,, Chairman &c.
MEMORANDUM.
First-Is it the duty of the Governor and Council
Co., I'D Ila,Nrn a,,tn
tves to the Legislature to allow corrections therein
by the record under the constitution and the laws OF
this State, and to what cases can such corrections
extend? If not their duty have they the right or
power to allow such corrections at their option?
Seconds return signed by less than majority
of the aldermen Of city defective that 1t cannot
be counted as it stands? If defective can duly
atested copy of the record be substituted for it and
be legally counted? The cases OF Lewiston, Bath,
Rockland and Saco referred to.
Thirds return which places number of votes
opposite the word scattering" SO defective that it
cannot be counted when the whole number of votes
so placed if added to any minority candidate would
still leave clear plurality to another candidate2
And if defective on its face can it be corrected
by the record? The case referred to is that OF the
city of Portland.
Fourth-If return has not the signature of the
town clerk, in the cases of Lebanon and Albion,
can duly attested copy of the record be substituted
therefor and the votes be legally counted?
Fifth-Have the Governor and Council any right
to reject return bearing the personal signatures
of the clerk and majority of the municipal officers
because from evidence aliunde they are satisfied it
was not signed or sealed in open town meeting or
was signed by the selectmen in blank at the meet
ing and after adjournment filled in by the clerk, or
because one of the selectmen signed the return in
blank filling in the name of the town and county
before the town meeting, the other two signing and
sealing in open town meeting The alleged cases or
JAY Lisbon and other towns are referred to- Or be-
the return was sent to the Secretary OF states
office unseaed as is alleged IN the case OF sears
port because the record specified In the Consul
tuition, Art. 4, Part l, Sec. 8, was not made up in
the presence of the selectmen and in open town
meeting as is alleged in the of Webster, Lis
bon and other towns, especially If a written memo
randum of the persons voted for with the number OF
votes for each person against his name is made by
the clerk in the presence of the Selectmen and IN
open town meeting, though not put upon the record
book of the town till after the meeting adjourned;
or because one of the selectmen signing is an alien
alleged in the case of Cherryhed, all other sig
natures being regular in all respects or because the
de facto officers who sign the return from any cause
were not legally chosen or were disqualified from
holding the office; because the return is attested
by clerk ''pro tempore' as in the case of Vance
boro: or BIZ a deputy clerk'' as in the case of
Scarboro or because second return was sent to the
Secretary of State differing from the first in the
number of votes returned for the various candidates
under the facts of the Fairfield case? Have the
G and Council any right to receive evidence
either of the above points, and If SO on which?
Sixth-Is it competent for the Governor and
Council when a return states the names of the per-
SONS voted for and the number of votes for each,
and each signature is genuine, to admit evidence
aliunde as to any neglect in the town officers be-
fore at the towu meeting, to comply with any OF
the various requirements of the constitution and
lawsf
Seventh-Is it the duty of the Governor and
Council or have they the right to reject return
because the whole number OF ballots is not stated
therein, as in Otisield and other towns or because
the whole number of ballots stated differs from
the sum of the votes returned for the several cand
dates as in the case of Harrington and other towns?
Eighth-Has a ballot with the names of the can
didates printed in two columns instead of one dis
tinguishing mark within the meaning of the statute
SO that it should be received into the ballot box?
If so received and returned is it the duty of the
Governor council to count it, even if protest
with a specimen ballot is annexed to and sealed up
with the return by the selectmen and the return
made subject to the legality of the ballot alleged
in the case of Skowhegan.
Ninth-Should votes returned as cast for John
Burnham and John Burman be counted for the
two different persons; or votes returned for
Alfred Cushman and Afford or Alfard Cushman or
for James w. Clark and James w. Clarke; or for
John T. Wallace and John T. Wallace, Jr? Are
these and all other errors in the and initials
of the persons voted for correctbe by the record?
Tenth-If the vote of the first candidate named
in return is carried out in letters and figures and
the vote of the three succeeding candidates is in
Dictated by ditto mark thus:
|ZII
: 3 ?