The Worthington advance. [volume] (Worthington, Minn.) 1874-1908, 1880-01-29
ca PERJURED POLITICIANS.

that Il hearing would be had in the Sup
rene Court on that day Oh the petition
of Sheriff Miller for writ of mandam-
us to compel Town to deliver up the
office. The answer of J. A. Town was
so grossly false in every material par
| ticular that 1t astoniShed even those
who knew his character and who are
familiar with Rohrer's method of draw
ing false statements and inducing his
! clients to make affidavit thereto.
This false swearing had its effect for
tile Court appointed 4 Referee to take
testimony. Rohrer and Town have
STAYED off the issuing of the writ which
was the point they wished to gain.
This will carry it beyond the trial of
the contest which begins on Wednes-
day next.
Below we give the answer of Town
| and Rohrer us reported in the Pioneer
Press. We need not Say to our own
people that it is Il batch of falsehoods
from beginning to end, for they will
readily sec that, but to parties abroad
we wish to say that it is false in every
material statement and worthy of the
| desperate and batiled politicians who
concoctcd it:
After denying point blank all the as
serlions rs to Miller's election, ETC., in
the prayer Of the petitioner, the respon-
dent j. "A. Town, proceeds to state in
his answer that, on the Sth inst, the
rclator handed him a notice that the re-
lator hid that day duly qualified as
sheriff, and demanded the office and its
belongings Should be turned over 10 the
rclator. But the respondent claims
that Aliller's bond, oath and certificate
OF election were not filed in lie. office
OF the REGISTER Of deeds on the Sth of
Janu'ry, nor were they filed until Il
long tine after that date. The entry
appearing on the books of the register
and upon the bond, purporting that the
bond WAS flied 10 II. LII. on JANUARY s.
1850, is asserted to be false, Fraudulent
and ante-tlatcd. The bond is alleged
not to have been filed until late in the
forenoon of the following day, and the
oath of Office and certificate were not
recorded in amy Of The registers books
the 10th of January. and none Of the
{ o 'n,nents We're in the registers Office
until that hour. They were, in fact, in
the REGISTERS rockets or in lis dwelling.
The Opponent ne It 4, g c: at at few
u inutrs ln fore 10 Il. III. OF January $.
Niller'S bond WAS taken from the files
of the county commissioners. then in
session, but without the consent or :,u-
thority OF the board or of the county au-
d tor. and there is no record Of any ac-
ton by the board Oh the bond when the
ii )cuN.cnt WAS 50 taken. The seal of
the comfy auditor was placed upon The
puipnrtotl approval Of the bond by the
board without the consent or knoWl-
edge Of the board Oh the auditor. bv
some one unknown to the respondent,
who gained surreptitious possession Of
the seal. The dorostiny of the bond
with the register OF deeds had also been
accomplished without the consent and
knowledge Of the county board or audi
tor. When tie demand was made uron
Town to give up the 'sIieriff's office, all
that lie nosSeSsAM pertaining thereto
were certain Writs ETC.. in process of
tXpc'n ion and certain books which he
had paid for himself, the county COM
missioNcrs having refused to pay for
them. The jail, it's only prisoner and
its keys were III charge CT the duly quail
lied j'iler. \
Tn respondent then proceeds to give
his version OF the manner in which Mil
ler obtained his cert iiicate of election.
Dn the 7th of last November. the coun.
~ audi>orand two just ices o: the peace,
II. ID. IulniStnn and |. l.. Durler, con
yenou rs y ca: Sa>sing board and DETER
mined that Town had received ;},;S
votes for sheriff and Miller 81. With
ut declaring the respondent had been
elected. the board SCI a atel, tut mat
again ut 1 p. III. on the ntXt day. The
board then received u pretended and
fictitious return from an election dis
trict called 1.-THE town of Olney and
town. 1G3, r. - The respondent de-
'lafrS there is no such election district
in Mobiles county, town 1863. r. /: being
an nnorganiZ"l congressional township
without Il voting place herein. neither
has there ever been established an rlec-
ton precinct or district for The two
towns. The town of Omey, Oh the 9TH
CT hand, is duly organized. On the
second day of meeting, the CnnvuSsiug
board opened the returns from the pre-
tended district and inserted thertfrUm
in the official cunvass thirty.six votes
Tor Miller and twenty -tive for Town,
and therefore declare Il each had rtciv-
I'd the Saline nunber OF votcs-303. The
board ,n.l:lt no mention OF its s"par.l-
ton a:,1 subsequent meeting, but rep
resented Tat the Whole canvass had
been commenced aud completed in one
day, November ., 1879. 1t is further
alleged that, late in the day last named.
rf, Il ! T. ~; G
read tlerefrom the name of Il. II. Mil
Ter. and imnr diattly destroyed the slip.
Fhereupon Miller wt,s declared by him
10 Dr. elected sheriff, alt lough, us the
respondent alleges. Dnrlte's acts Il, 4
d+c]aration were wholly illegal, uncon-
Stitut!"llal and void. The county Au-
tn Miller, because he was so advised by
Miller and believing that the slip drawn
ny DIrlrr was Il genuine ballot cast for
Miller. 1t is moreover claimed hy The
respondent that the auditor never in
tende.| to certify That Miller had re-
ceivcd the greater number OF votes; but
the alleged certificate was hpnd,rl to
Miller. not us a delivery, but simply for
his inspection. he refusing afterwards
to give it up, unless the county auditor
would change the figures 303 to 39l.-
The auditor rendered to Miller Il ctrti-
ticate showing the tie vote anl the act
of Durfee, but Miller refused that Ger
tificatr, and refused to qualify upon it;
though. requested to do SO Ivy the co,ln-
ty commissioners and the county audi
tor.
The respondent then lays claim to
having been himself dull elected; where
as the reiator, being the deputy clerk
OF the No!lts county district court, is
not eligible for the office Of sheriff. and
has never presented to the respondent
any proof Of his election as sheriff.
Tie contest between them is now in
the dist rict court. where the respondent
wishes it to !'e tried on lis merits.
The foregoing petition and answer
having been elaborated upon by eX-Gov.
D'vis in behalf Of Miller aud by Messrs.
krr: & Wilson. Of st. Paul, and Daniel
1Sohl'cr. Of Worthingt on. for Town. the
pttf.,,