The Portland daily press., 1880-01-03
Those Questions.
AS SUBMITTED Az GOV. GARCELON
The Questions Ex-Gov. Morrill, Wished
to Have Submitted.

Governor Garcelon has yielded to the judg
ment of his counsel, Mr.. A. P. Gould. and, a
| 1t IS stated, in opposition to the protestation
of Mr.. Pillsbury, has submitted twelve ques
tons to the Supreme Court, which are a
follows:
When the Governor and Council decide tina
there is no return from city on which Repre-
sentatives can be summoned to attend and taxi
their seats in the Legislature, is it their dut.
to order new election, or is it competent FOL
the house of Representatives, if it shall appea
that there was an election of such Representa-
tives, to admit them to seats, though no return
thereof was made and delivered to the office O
the Secretary of State
Is it competent for the Governor and Coun
Gil to allow the substitution Of other evidence
in place of the returned copies of such lists a.
are provided for in article 4, part l, section 8
of the Constitution, to enable them to deter
mine what persons appear to be elected Repre-
sentativeS to the Legislature by plurality o.
all the votes returned?
Is a return signed by majority of the select
men of q town or the aldermen OF a city valC
within the requirements of same section?
Is a return by the aldermen of city which
does not give the number of votes cast for each
person voted for as member of the Legisla
ture, and does not show what persons were vo
ted for as such member in any one of the sever
al wards of such city, a valid return within
the requirements of the same section?
Are returns from towns or cities which are
not attested by the town or city clerk valid
within the same section?
Have he Governor and Council a right to
reject returns of the election OF members Of the
Legislature, required by the same section, from
the officers of towns, which were not made.
signed and sealed up in open town meeting?
Is the return of two persons purporting to be
of n sufficient
evidence of the vote of the town, when it ap-
pears that there were at the time of the meet
ing at which the election was had but two
selectmen of that town?
Can a person who is not citizen of the
United States at the time be legally elected OF
constituted Selectman of the town?
If ballot has distinguishing mark in the
Judgment of the Governor and Council, such
as would make it illegal under the statute,
have they authority to disregard it in their as
elected, where ii appears by the official return
of the officers of the town that such vote was
received by the Selectmen, subject to the OBJ
lection, and its legality referred to the Govern
or and Council for decision?
If the names of any persons appear in the
return without any number of votes being
stated or carried out against them, either in
words or figures, is it the duty of the Governor
and Council to treat those persons as having
the same number of votes as another person
received for the same Office, and whose name
is placed first in The return, if they find dots
under the figures or words set against such 9TH
er persons name?
Have the Governor and Council the legal
right to decide what kind of evidence they
will receive, and what the mode OF proceeding
before them shall be, to enable them to deter
mine the genuineness of returns required by
the article and section of the constitution
above mentioned?
If the Governor and Council have before
them two lists of votes, returned from the
same town, differing materially from each
other in the number of votes returned as cast
for the same persons, but identical in all other
respects, both having been duly received at
the Secretary's Office, and they have no evil
dence to enable them to determine which is
the true and genuine return, are they required
to treat either of them as valid, and if so,
which?
The above interrogatories differs materially
from those submitted by Ex-Governor Morrill,
to the Governor at the request of the latter
as the subjoined copy of the Morrill, questions
will show:
THE MORRILL, QUESTIONS.
First-Is it the duty of the Governor and Council
in canyassing returns for Senators and Representa-
tives 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 a return signed by less than majority
of the aldermen of city so defective that it cannot
atested copy of the record be substituted for it and
be legally counted? The cases of Lewiston, Bath,
Rockland and Saco are referred to.
Thirds return which places number OF votes
opposite the word SCATTERING 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 candidate?
And if so defective its face can it be corrected
by the record? The referred to is that of the
city of Portland.
Fourth-If a return has not the signature of the
town clerk as 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
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 OF
Jaw Lisbon and other towns referred to. Or be-
cause the sent to the Secretary OF States
office unsealed as is alleged in the case of Sears
tuition, Art. T. Part l, Sec. 5, was not made up in
the presence of the selectmen and in open town
meeting as is alleged in the cases of Webster, Lis
bon and other towns, especially II 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 seectmen and IN
book of the town till after the meeting adjourned;
or because one of the selectmen signing is an alien
alleged in the case of Cherryfeld, 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, were disqualified from
holding the office; or because the return is attested
by clerk ''pro tempore" as in the case of Vance
boro or By a deputy clerk as In the case OF
Scarboro; 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
Governor and Council any right to receive evidence
on either of the above points, and If so on which?
Sixth-Is it competent for the Governor and
Council when 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
aunde 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
laws?
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 Otisfeld and other towns; or because
the whole number of ballots stated differs from
the of the votes returned for the several cand
dates as in the of Harrington and other towns?
Eighth-Has a ballot with the names OF the can
didates printed in two columns instead OF one dis
tingushing mark within the meaning of the statute
so that it should not be received into the ballot box?
If so received and returned is it the duty OF the
Governor and council to count it, even if protest
with 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 as alleged
in the case of SkOwhegan.
Ninth-Should votes returned as cast 1or Jonn
Burnham and John Durham be counted for the
same or 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 4. Wallace and John I. Wallace, Jrf are
these and all other errors in the names and initials
of he persons voted for correctible 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
z 3 z s