The Worthington advance. [volume] (Worthington, Minn.) 1874-1908, 1879-12-04


that fact Lut 40 votes were 81, received d
at said pretended election polling place
at said Office Of said i. d. Bennett, and
none whatever ut any other place, and
contestant alleges that said II. r. Mil
Ter received but " votes, and no more at
SAID pretended election held at said of
iice=Of II B. Bennett 5 j85sss.asse
8. That III tile election district Of De-
wall, composed of tile town Of tDewald
in said county, at said election held
therein on Nov. 4, 1879, this contestant,
J. A. Town, received seventeen votes
for said office of sheriff, all cast by duly
qualified electors Of said town. That
the judges of said election wholly re-
fused O'count or canvass all or any of
said seventeen votes for this contestant.
J. \. Town, and wholly refused and
neglected to return all or any thereof to
the county Auditor of said county, and
the county canvasssing board of said
county wholly neglected and refused to
count, canvass or include any or all of
said seventeen votes in the number
cast for this contestant at said election
+ ! said Office OF sheriff.
That forty votes were present and &C.
tually voted ut said election held in
said election district of Dewald on Nov.
4, 1879, but that said judges of election
counted, canvasse.l and returned thir-
ty-nine ballots and no more, and Who'll
ly refused and neglected to count or re-
turn one ballot Tor any office or for any
person whatever.
That at said election in said Dewald
said Il. Il. Miller received but twenty
Two votes and 10 more for the office Of
sheriff OF said county, and said judges
counted, citnvaSsed and returned to the
county auditor of said county rs votes
for SAID Il. X. Miller for said office of
sheriff, and said county canVassing
board inciuuedall of said rs votes in the
number cast for said Il. Il. Miller for
said Office of sheriff, ut said annual cleo
ton.
i. That OH said Nov. 4, 1879, certain
persons opened I; poll and pretended to
hold an election ut the house of one Pc
ter Bloom in said county in a certain
congressional township numbered l04
OF range II, in said county. That said
persons received votes there that day
for the Office Of sheriff aforesaid and
made u pref ended count, CANVASS and
return thereof to the county Auditor
Of said county ulder the name of re-
turns from the election district Of
Bloom, showing and claiming that said
II, Il. Miller had received ten votes at
THAT place that day for the said Office of
sheriff and the contestant had received
four votes and no more for said Office.
That said county canvassing board ille-
gAlly counted, cAnvasseu and included
all of said ten votes in the number cast
for said II. Il. Miller for said office and
four votes and no more for tlliscontest-
ant for said office.
That said township 104, range IL, or
said alleged town OF Bloom, has. never
been organized into il township and is
not and never was Il town or IN election
district. That no town meeting was
ever held ut the house Of said Peter
Bloom, nor was the house of said Peter
was held, ever designated by vote or
as the place Of holding said election for
1879. That no list or record OF the
names Of the persons voting there on
sons voting there that day, was kept by
any person orpersons in any way OF any
manner. That no attempt was made
nor steps taken i'll any manner after
said pretended polls were closed to as
certain whether the ballots cast at said
pretended election agreed in number
with the number of persons voting.
But that the persons holding said pre-
tended election proceeded to count,
canvass and return said ballots or votes
to the county auditor without so ascer-
tanning or making All attempt to ascer-
tain that said ballots corresponded in
number with tue persons voting. and
that the said persons making said re-
turn that fourteen persons were pres
ent and voting 1T said place, ariivedat
said result and made said report solely
and only Oh the ground that they claim
ed that vile; said polls were closed,
they found fourteen ballots III the bal
lot box or other receptacle for said
votes. That in point Of fact said r. Il.
Miller received but eight votes, and no
more at said pretended election ut said
house of Peter Bloom, for said Office of
sheriff. and no election was held on
said Nov. i, 1879, in said alledged town
of Bloom, save rs above stated.
THE above we give verbatim from
the papers served on Mr.. Miller. In
the remaining points we give exactly
the grounds Of contest but stripped of
the legal verbiage and wearisome repe-
titions.-ED. ADVANCED
5. That in Westside Town received
So votes and Miller IS votes; that the
judges Of election returned only So
votes for Town AMI IS for Miller; that
the canvassing board counted the
whole % vot. s 10: Miller and did not
count more than So votes for Town; and
that this affected the result.
6. That pretended election was held
at the hous; Of one Knipps in town 104,
range IS; that the pretended board re-
turned ii votes for Miller and but
votes for Town; that this pretended e.
lection district was called Le0ta; that
the county CanvuSSing board counted
the whole IL votes for Miller, while in
fact lie received but 10 votes; that the
town called l.eota was never organized
as Il town Or all election di trsct; that
a voter named Rutherford who could
not read asked for Il straight Republic
can ticket and that a judge Of the cleo
ton gave him one with the name of
II. Il. Miller on the same and that he
voted it and would not have done 50 had
he known that the name Of Miller was
on it.
!. That in Lorain township 10 list of
the names or number of persons voting
was returned to HE Auditor, and no
STEPS were taken to ascertain whether
the number Of ballots CON espunded with
the number Of persons voting.
s. That the county canvassing board
met Oh the eth Of Nov. and proceeded
to canvass the votes returned; that it
was found that Town had 1858 votes
and Miller 357 votes; that the board