The Portland daily press., 1880-04-05
That Somerville Case Again.

The Lewiston Gazette publishes state
town of Somerville, which though the same
in substance as that made in the interview
with the Chronicle correspondent, fixes one
point more definitely, and that is the hand
writing of the signatures to thereturn which
he at first said was an amended return and
now pronounces an original one. The fol-
lowing is the material portion of the state
ment:
am the Town Clerk of Somerville and 1
was present at the annual election held in that
town on the 8th of last September. 1 checked
the list Of voters until the polls were closed.
When the vote was declared, some seven or
eight took Greenback duplicate vote and a
Republican vote, and when the vote was
counted up it was declared and these men
wrote en- the duplicates the number of the votes
that each candidate received. / carried the
records of the balloting home and filled it out
at home. The next day, on the 9th in the
forenoon, I finished up the returns but had not
made the record. l made the returns from the
the ballots. Afterwards made the records
from the ballots. did not do anything with
the returns at town meeting at all but made
them up at home. Between the hours of four
and five on thei9th of September carried them
in person and delivered them in the Secretary
1ectman some years, and when was selectman
I used my own name, but for the fifteen years
have been town clerk L have in every in
stance but two made the returns out at home
and signed the selectmen's names myself.
On the 10Th of last February, L was sum.
moned before the special investigating COM
mittee 1 went on the 18th in the evening
Before went before the Committee man by
the name of Morrill, Glidden, who was at the
election in September, had previously been be-
for t1,ai iv,x,a ftau
wards learned. When went in they handed
me the returns of the September election, one
at time and asked me if they were in my
handwriting and l said they were. They
said I did, and that I had done SO at
home. They asked me if filled out the re-
turns in open town meeting. I replied that l
did not; that made them out at home. They
asked me if Morrill, Glidden did not stand by
me and asked me to make out the G. in the
or they would mistake it for G. or something
to that effect. 1 said no. They said, do you
pretend to say that Glidden did not stand over
you to make that g. palmer and that you did
tions of Mr.. Glidden, and replied no, They
asked me if would swear that Glidden did
no6 +. cmpt me to make that G. palmer. I
said 1 would. They then asked me, supposing
it be true that G1i65er did stand over your
shoulder and prompt you to change the G. so
be true, what have you to say to this pointing
to the return sent in there, what called the
original return. said if that be true 1 should
call this copy, but added it is uot true; in
my opinion this is the original return.
Now assuming all this to be atrue, how
much better off does it leave the Council
lors? The signatures were all in one hand
writing. Bowler says they were and Gov.
Garcelon when shown the return pronounced
them to be so without any hesitation.
The return was counted. Yet the Coun-
Gil had laid down a rule that the returns
must be actually signed by each selectman
or they could not be counted. They had
applied this rule to the New Sharon return
and thus counted out Republican represen-
tative. Why did they not apply it to Somer-
vile? Simply because by not doing so they
could count in Fusion Senator. Fur
thermore, the Council threw out several
Republican towns because the returns were
notsigned and sealed in town meeting. Bow
Ter says he made up the Somerville returns at
his house the next day after election. Why
was not the Somerville return thrown out
on this ground? Another explanation is
needed from Tabulator Fogg.