Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1880-01-24
Renort Of the COMMITTEES in the
Mock Legislature on Questions
RI he Submitted to the Supreme
Naax.f
STATE OF MAINE.
House. OF REPRESENTATIVES,,

to be SuOmlttcu W sAAS sup
| Court.
| HOUSE, OF REPRESENTATIVES,,
! January %, 1850.
| The committee appointed to consider the
ores,;on of the constitutional organization OF
| the House and the present condition OF aHair>.
and which has been Instructed 10 plep'te
! and present to the House statement Oh iae'>
| With ouestions anpen led thereto To be pre-
sentei TO the Judges of the Supreme Judic>ai
Cont. have attended 10 their duty anu ASK
leave 10 report:
| Statement.
From evidence produced before your com
mit,ee the committee find the following lac's
in rerar, TO the Governor and touhcii III tx
lIa,ion 70 the returns of votes for members OF
~, Sen,,e and House of Representatives. OF
The 59th legislature of Maine: TN the l''h
dow of November A. d. 1879, the
iCovarner and Council commenced TO
onen ,i,., returned copies of the lists OF votes
for senators and representatives 10 me
5oth legislature which were made ana Tor
varied 10 the Secretary of State, ov oncers
of the several cities towns and plantations IN
This State and were opened by the ''overnor
and Council. The Governor and Council then
proceeded 10 examine said returned copies
If said lists of roteS. for the purpose of as
rtr
elected 10 the senate and house of representa-
rive. by u plurality of all votes returned ::
at,er careful examination of returns them
selves they entertained all evidence offered
in which it WAS proposed 10 show that returns
from any town or city did not agree with the
record of the vote of such town or city when
was made up in open meeting as the consti-
tutiou REQUIRES in number ri votes or names
OF persons voted for.
They did not after about Nov. %. 1879. ex-
clude or refuse to hear or consider any such
evidence. but held open sessions and gave all
persons ample opportunity to present snch
records and to he heard thereupon, excepting
n, such times as the Governor and Council
were engaged in other official business. until
the tav on which they were required by the
constitution to issue summon>eS to such per-
sons as appeared 10 De elected by plurality
of all votes returned, to attend and take their
eats They heard counsel in argument In
al, cases in dispute that arose during their
examination of returns. where II Was desired.
AT such times is convenient for the Governor
and Council. and in no instance was any
party interested, or their counsel prcciudtd
from hearing, except Tor Il few DAYS after
the Governor and Council commenced to open
returns. and before they had themselves suti-
cientlv examined them to perceive upon
what points doubts might arise Is
TO the correctness of returns and they declined
all hearings until about 2Ith OF November
after which time their sessions were open.
and all interested parties were freely heard :;
copies of records made up III open meetings
us the constitution requires were presented to
them from large number of the cities and
towns of the State. all Of which were care
fully examined by the Governor and Council
and all testimony and argument offered con
ul.,.~. 1 1.
instance the Governor and Council con>id-
cred and determined as issue of fact, whether
there was any difference between record and
return. and which was correct and in no in
stance did they refuse to correct Il return by
a copy of u record of town made in open
town meeting, or by copy of record made by
city clerk in meeting Of aldermen. us re
suircd bv the constitutions In several in
stances where IN original record was presented
and found to agree with the returns, records
were afterwards presented which had beef.
made up by town and city clerks long after
original records were made. and in most
instances after returns had becnopcned by the
Governor and Council and compared with the
original records; and found to be in entire
correspondence Herewith. Such new records
not made in any open meeting, the Governor
and Council decided were not admissible to
correct returns, ant.they decided as matter
of fact. in all such cases that the original
return and record were correct, and therefore
in no instance did they correct returns by
such new amended records. In some in
stances oral evidence was offered to prove
that the votes cast were not intended for per-
sons named in the returns and original
record in all such cases the Governor and
Council found as matter of fact that the
original return wos correct, and determined
not to make any change upon the verbal evil
dence. Twenty DAYS before the first We'd
nesday in January, lsSo, the Governor and
Council issued summonses to such persons
as appeared to be elected thereto hv plu-
rality of all the votes returned, tn attend and
take their seats in the Senate and House Of
Representatives as the constitution requires
In no instance was a summons issued to any
person who was not voted TO. or who was
not elected by plurality of all the vote, re-
turned, a. appeared by returns duly examined
and adjudicated upon by the Governor and
Council as hereinafter set forth. The Gov
ernor and Council examined the return. frcm
the cities of Portland. RockIand Saco Lew
iston and Bath, and found ascertaincd and
determined as a matter of fact. that said
returns did not show that the Aldermen of
either of said cities. did. in the presence of
the city clerk open, examine and compare
the copies from lists of votes given in the
several WaruS Oh sai1 cities. or that the city
clerk of said cities made record thereof
and that return thereof was made
into the Secretary Of States office in the
same manner as selcctmen of towns are re-
quired to do. They also had before them the
original records from said several cities and
had evidence and arguments respecting the
same, from parties and counsel interested
therein. claiming there was evidence of an
election IN said cities. and thereupon CON
sldering the returns, the records arguments
and evidence, adludicated thereupon and found
AS matter OF fact that there was no sufficient
evidence which would warrant their correc-
ton of the original Return or which proved
20 their satisfaction that any persons were
elected as representative from said cities
and they therefore declared and remarked
vacancies IN the same. In the case of Port
land record was made up by the CITY clerk
after the original return and original record
had been examined by the Governor and
Council differing materially from the return
and original record. But the Governor and
Council decided that such evidence was in
competent to establish an election in said citv
he Hovernor and Council made report tn