The Worthington advance. [volume] (Worthington, Minn.) 1874-1908, 1880-01-01

THURSDAY. IA
evidence aluinde they are satisfied it was
not signed or sealed in open town meeting,
u was signed by the selectmen in blank ct
the meeting, and, after adjournment, Allied
IN by the clerk, or because if one of the
selectmen sigLed the return in blank, filing
10 the name of the town and of the county
before the town meeting, the other two
signing and sealing in open town meeting
tshe alleged cases of Jay, Stoneham, Lisbon
aud other towns are referred TOY. Or be-
cause the return was sent to the
secretary of states Office unsealed, as is
alleged in the case of Searsport, or
because the record specified in the constitu-
ton, srticie four, part one, section five, was
not made up in the presence of the select
| men and in open town meeting as is
alleged in the cases of Webster, Lisbon and
other towns, especially if 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 until after the meeting adjourned. Or
because one of the seelctmen signing is an
s!ien Is alleged in the case of Cherryfeld,
eii the other signatures being regular
tpe all respects. Or because
TIE de facto officers who sign
returns from any cause were not legally
chosen, and were disqualified from holding
the office. Or because the return is attested
by clerk pro tempore as in the case of
Vanceboro. Or by deputy clerk as in the
mi NJ H.
turn was sent to the secretary of state differ
ing from the first in the numbers of votes
returned for the various candidates, under
the facts of the Greenfield case.
Have the governor and council any right
to receive evidence on either of the above
points, and if 80, on which?
Sixth-1s it competent for the governor
and council, when return states the names
of persons voted for and the number of
votes for each, and each signature is genuine,
to admit evidence a2Iu,ade az to any neglect
of town officers before town meeting to
comply with any of the various require
ments of the constitution and laws?
Seventh-1s it the duty of the governor
and council, or have they the right, to reject
return because the whole number of bal
lots is not stated therein, as in Otterfeld and
other towns, or because the whole number
of ballots differ from the sum of votes re-
turned for the several candidates, as in the
case of Far nington and other towns.
Eighth-Has ballot with the names of
candidates printed in two columns instead
of one, distinguishing mark within the
meaning of the statute so that it should not
be received into the ballot box? If so re-
ceived and returned, is it the duty of the
governor and council to count it even if
protest with specimen ballot is annexed
and sealed up with the return by the select
men and the return made subject to the
legality of the ballot as alleged in the case
of Skowhegan.
Ninth-Should votes returned as cast for
Jno. Burnham and John Burnam be counted
for the same or two different persons, or
votes returned for Alfred or Afford Cush-
man, or for James w. Clark or James w.
Clarke. or John T. Wallace or John r. Wal
lace, Jr.?
Ten.h-If the vote of the first candidate
named in return is carried out in letters
and figures, and the votes of tho three sue
ceeding candidates are indicated by ditto
marks, should the votes returned for the
last three candidates be rejected. If any
defect exists in such return is it correct
able by the records.
1A0NOAtA-4X6tc lu0 governor 60O
council the right to reject a return on the
ground that two or more of the signatures
were forged or written by one hand, merely
on an inspection of the return itself without
evidence from either of the officers purport-
ing to sign, as in the case of Webster, Lis
bon, New Sharon and other towns, or have
they the right to reject such returns or any
! evidence submitted by one party alone
without first giving notice to the other
party and giving him the right to introduce
counter evidence, or have they the right to
act on or consider any protests, affidavits or
papers outside of the returns
unless upon point TINT the signatures Of the
! subscribing officers were not affixed with
| their own hands, or have they the right
reject any return on account of such protest,
! afhdavits, or papers taken tx parte and filed
by one party without the knowledge of the
other, without first giving to such adverse
| party notice and the right to introduce coun-
| ter evidence.
| Twelfth Should the returns Herewith
annexed, from the town of Go ldsboro, be
counted for Oliver P. Bragdon, or Oliver
| i. Bragdon, all other towns in the same
class being returned for Oliver 2. Bragdon?
Thirteenth-When the governor and
council decide that there is no return from
city or town on which Representative
can be summoned to the legislature, is it
their duty to take such steps as will insure
the voters of such city or town new elec-
ton, by which they can secure Representa-
tive in the legislature? CThe cases of five
disfranchised cities are referred to)
Fourteenth-Have the governor and
council the right, and is it their duty to re-
call any certificate of election Improperly or
erroneously issued to any Senator or Rep
resentative, or if they cannot recall Ger
tiicate, have they the right, and is it their
duty, to issue q new certificate to the person
entitled thereto.
| MORE PETITIONS.
AUGUSTA, Me-, Dec. 28.-Numerous peti-
tions were forwarded to Gov. Garcelon to-
night, praying that he will refer all matters
in dispute touching tie election of members
of the legislature to the supreme judicial
court. Bangor sent five large petitions, en-
bracing in all 587 namee, including men in
all professions and callings. Many Demo-
Gratis and Greenbackers signed the
petitions. Portland sends three strong
petitions, aggregating 49C names, en-
embracing large proportion of prominent
names IN the city. Hon. VIM. L. Putnam,
with Emery Ridlow, serd petitions differently
worded from the others, but praying with
equal urgency that the matters in dispute be
referred to the court. Thirteen eminent
ministers of the gospel, including Bishop
Neeley, of the Episcopal church, and Rev.
Thomas Hill, ex-president of Harvard col
flege, and representatives of all churches,
send similar petitions.
Augusta sends petition headed by Thos.
Lombard, q prominent Democrat, and signed
by hundred and two leading citizens, in
clnding three ex.governors. Hon. Joseph
Williams, Hon. Anson p. Merrill and Hon.
Selden Conaor.
Skowhegan sends petition signed by
Judge Jas. Bell and los others.
Ellsworth sends petition headed by ex-