Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1880-08-31

tu uSbulu, AuctNSSAts ""~~'
remove il entirely, 80 that their work
was afterwards detected and putting the
two returns together, decided that both
should be thrown out. IS one contradicted
the other. Then in their defense they
explain the case as follows;
The Town OF Fairfield these two sets OF
retuEns were sealed up and the municipal
officers .igGed the certificates on the face
OF the envelopes, alleging that they were
sealed mp in open town Meeting. Zach or
thes. returns contrsdicted the otises sst
and Il ,cds Impossible 20 md out from tAese
contradictory papers 'chdt the rote OF ne
fot-u ,cds Both sets were therefore re-
iec,ed. The rejection of the returns from
this town gave he Certificate ct lieei,ep TO
Harper Allen, Fusion candidate, ne resei,'
ing a majority OF the votes thrown IN the
two other towns composing the district.
Thieves defense sigaad by
ALoNzo GARcsiIoS,
=. =. Brown,
john b. FOSTER,
CHAs. II. CHASE,
FREpERIck q. PABKEB.
HALsEY III. MONROE,
FRANK NJ. fo6G.
The following testimony from the town
clerk Of Fairfield shows the defense to be
lie. The returns could be distinguished
BY the slips of paper attached, as is de-
clared BY the town clerk, and as was
known by Councillor Brown. fer be had
given personal advice in the matter.
The clerk said:
Q. What did you do when you dis
covered the error in the count OF the
votes.l A We filed out a second set OF
returns according 10 our new count We had
made, an amended set o! returns.
.. Were those signed By the seieetmen
and town clerk? A. Yes sir.
.. As they signed the first: A. Yes.
q. Please examine Exhibit IA, G. ID. B.,
clerk OF committee" which purports 10 be
set OF returns for Governor, Senators,
Representatives and County officers, from
Fairfield and state whether or not those
are the second returns: A / have no
doubt those are the second set OF returns.
.. Do you find those returns 20 be made
up on ofrcial blanks such as you received
from Augusta In the first instance: A. i
think they are.
.. Identical in every Particular /. !
think so.
U. What did you do with those second
returns sieer they were signed by the Sc
lectmen and yourself? A. At the sugges
ton OF the chairman Of the board at
tached 10 the top OF each or then 0 slip
saving Amended return OF the town Of
Fairfield, Sept %, 1879"
U. Examine the returns now in your
hands ana see whether you find the origi-
nal slip attached 70 The return for county
officers, and 10 the return for Governor!
A. Yes, sir.
.. You lind them the original slips
each Is piece Of paper about three inches
long by an inch and half wide? A. Yes,
sir.
q. How were those slips attached TO the
returns? A. Attached by means OF
mucilage.
.. They were put in the upper left hand
corner OF the face OF the returRl A. They
vera
U. For the purpose OF showing that
these returns were not originals but mere
" amended returns: A. Yes, sir
U. Examine the returns for senator apd
Representatives and state what you ma
their condition 10 be so far as those slips
are concerned? A. The slips are torn of
in these esses.
O. Do YOU or not and in both instances,
where those are torn OF. the lax marks
where the letters commenced? A. Yes.
Mr.. McFadden, it will be seen, swears
positively that each return had slip at
tached to it, and that it had been removed
only from the Representative returns,
while even on that, parts OF the paper
remained adhering.
Thus the Council had three sources of
information concerning these returns.
One of their own number knew the facts
perfectly well because they were told him
by the seieetmen; the letter contained all
the facts, and the amended slip told the
same story But what did they do:
They tod Brown that they had no right
TO pay attention 70 any statement made
by him, they neglected TO read the letter
or Il they read it they paid no attention
TO its contsnts, they tore of the slips
which had been pasted on the returns. |
Then they winked at one another and
said with chuekle, "We'l teach those
Fairfield fellows that it doesn't pay to be
honest when dealing with US reformers."
And then they proceeded to throw out
the vote on the pretence that they could
not tell which was the original return.
Gov. Garcelon himself practically adj
mitted that there was fraud in this case.
y yill b seen by his testimony below:
O. You do not think our friend Brown,
1t Fairfield, had anything TO do with f4ing
10 that Fairfield return? A. fWitleSs
sughs. I am rather inclined 70 think
some Of you fellows pasted these pieces Of
paper on /