Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1880-01-06

Calhoun ullifcation-obeying such laws
as they see fit, and wholly disregarding
others; doctrine, If submitted to, ffaught
with the direst consequences, and one that
viii inevitably result in the destruction of
all organized government, and the uprising
of the masses in the State today attest the
loyalty of the people and the falsity of the
assertions OF their ruler. Instead of allow
ing any Republican interested to show, As
the law expressly provides, for whom bal
lots were intended when the initial letter
happened to occur in the ballot OF a town
In the district, such ballots were thrown
out to make way for the election of an
opposition candidate who had received in
some instances but one-third the number
of ballots. Instead of receiving testimony
and endeayoring To ascertain the viii of
the people, in accordance with the provis-
ions of the constitution and the statute
law OF the land above quoted the Council
Chamber was closed against those who
were clearly and legally elected by the peo-
pie, and not one word was allowed 10 be
proved by Republican candidate. before
that august tribunal, nor were counsel even
permitted To examine the returns.
The cases are too numerous to mention
in detail They are well known TO every
intelligent man in the State. II il a noto-
rious fact that the Council Chamber was
unapproachable to any Republican Repre-
sentative, or his attorney, for the purposes
contemplated by the statute, AMI that which
the laws of this State prescribe 90 he done
openly, was done stcalthily aud IN secret.
Every Representative and Senator. who
has had his seat stolen by this gigantic
robbery, in defiance 10 the very laws which
the Executive has sworn To execute and
obey, and which he wants the people OF
New York and the nation nj large outside
OF Maine To believe he has followed. APP
pearcd either personally or by attorney at
Augusta. and. standing outside OF the
Council Chamber, appealed for an audience
DAY after day, before this obdurlte Exec
utive and his Council, as Henry VII of
Germany was compelled To stand before
the convent OF Pope Gregory VII At Can
osa. To seek abSolution and reconciliation
from that memorable pontif Bat were
they admitted? Was the law or one pro-
vision of II noticed by the Executive sworn
To obey Il? We leave the public 10 answer.
Again. Gov Garcclon would have the
people understand that he has acted in
accordance with the decisions OF the Judges
OF the supreme Court-he says THAT these
Judges have decided that ballots east for
William II. Smith aud W H. Smith are 10
be counted separately" and hc admits that
several changes have resulted from thi,
condition of affairs" Why, allow me 10
ask. does not Gov Garcclon. with his best
legal talent in the State, tell the people the
truth. that this decision which he refers 10
was drawn by the Judges Of the Supreme
Court NOR, than year before the lar of
1877. dLorc cited, i,dS cRGcicd,-and that,
although their decision was correct under
the law n Il stood prior 10 1877, the stat
ute OF ISL was enacted to obyiate the very
difficulties suggested by that decision, and
that since ne l1,r tras enacted he Judges
har, gic,n 90 such decision as H. preteHds
70 cite! These are the facts, and GOV.
Garcelon, with the best legal talent In
the State" which he 80 pompously parades
in his defence, well know it-and If they
do not Il Is well that he has not given pub
Lefty to their names.
There are decisions OF the Judges OF the
Supreme Court, and plenty OF them, that
interested parties arc not allowed 10 tes-
tify in their own behalf; but what would
be thought il the best legal talent In the
State" should stand up before Court
today aud cite those decisions: | appre-
bend the Court would smile, aud might
offer some suggestions TO the effect that
since those decisions were drawn the Leg
islature OF this State has seen III 10 pass
law eularging the rights Of parties in
that respect, and that the Court would not
feel bound by those decisions, but would
follow the statute law n IL exists today.
The decision referred to by Gov. Garce-
lon, and by which reference he would mis-
lead the people. whether Intentionally or
not | am not able 10 say, but must leave
that for his "best legal talent in the state
10 answer, was drawn Dec. 9. 1915, and
the statute was enacted, in accordance
with suggestion in that decision TO OBJ
viate the difficulties there met with, Feb.
., 1877. And yet the Executive of the
State, either in ignorance OF the law, or
willlully disregarding its provisions, cites
an old opinion drawn in reference 10 an
old provision OF the statute, and admits
that several changes have resulted from
this condition of affairs G., that an
initial letter to Il name was used, or a silent
letter in the middle of name was omitted,
etc. And he really means that guided by
a decision OF the Supreme Court that today
is not law, he and his Council have gone
on and acted under il, and several changes
have resulted from this condition of az
fairs" Really What defence to send
forth TO sensible people! l admire the
sagacity of this Doctor of Laws in send
ing it as far from New England as he did
for publication.
| also admire the consummate GOODNESS
which this dignitary possesses after hay