Stevens County tribune., 1880-01-01
he recordY The case referred to is that Of

Fourth-lf q return has not the signature |
of the town clerk, as in the case of Lebanon
and Albion, can duly attested copy of the
record be substituted therefor, and the vote
be legally counted?
Fifth-Have the governor and council
any right to reject return, bearing the
personal signature of the clerk and aisajori-
ty of the municipal officers. because from
evidence dIuGnde they are satisfied 1t was
not signed or sealed in open town meeting,
or was signed by the selsctmen in blank at
the meeting, and, after adiourament, filed
in by the clerk, or because if one of the
selectmen signed the return in blank, filing /
in the name of the town and of the county.
before the town meeting, the other two
signing and sealing III open town meeting |
(the alleged cases of jay, Stoneham, Lisbon |
and 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
tion, ar ,icle 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 a 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, ard 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
alien as alleged in the case of Cherryfeld,
all the other signatures being regular
the ell respects. Or because
the de facto officers who sign
II returns from any cause were not legally
chosen, and wers disqualified from holding
the office. Or because the return is attested
by a clerk pro tempore ss in the case of
Vanceboro. Or by deputy clerk as in the
case of Scarboro. Or because a second re-.
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 tho above
points, and if 30, on which?
Sixth-Is il 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 GtGunde as to any neglect
| of town officers before a town meeting TO
| comply with any of the various require
| ments of the constitution and laws?
Seventh--Is it the duty of the governor
and council, or have they the right, to reject
a 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 1ington and other towns.
Eighth-Has e ballot with the names of
candidates printed in two columns instead
of one, a distinguishing mark within the
meaning Of the statute so that it should not
be received into the ballot box? II SO re-
ceived and returned, is il the duty OF the
governor and council to count it even if a
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-Shonld votes returned as cast for
Jno. Burnham and John Burnam be counted
for the same or two different persas, or
votes returned for Alfred or Afford Cush-
man. or for James W. Clark or James W.
Clarke, or John I. Wallace or John L. Wal
lace, Jr.?
Tenth-E the vote Of the first candidate
named in q return is carried out in letters
and figures, and the votes of the three sQa-
ceeding candidates are indicated by ditto
marks, should the votes returned for the
last three candidates be rejected. If any
defect exists in such q return is it correct
abia by the records.
| Eleventh-Hava Tie governor and
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 withou,
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 evidenca, or have they the right to
act on or consider any protests, afidavits or
papers outside of the returns
unless upon point that the signatures of the
subscribing officers were not affixed with
their own hands, or have they the right t
reject any return on account of such protest,
afidavits, or papers taken ex parte and filed
by one party without the knowledge of the
other, without first giving to such adverse
party notice and the right to introducecoun-
ter evidence.
Twelfth Should the returns Herewith
annexed, from the town of Go ldsboro, be
counted for Oliver P. Bragdon, or Oliver
B. Bragdon, all other towns in the same
class being returned for Oliver P. Bragdon ?
Thirteenth-When the governor and
council decide that there is no return from
q city or town on which q 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 cleo
ton, by which they can secure a Representa-
tive in the legislature? (The cases Of five
disfranchised cities are referred toy
Fourteenth-Haye the governor and
council the right, and is it their duty to re-
call any certificate of election improperly or
enormously issued to any Senator or Rep
resentative, or if they cannot recall GER
ti6cate, have they the right, and is it their
duty, to issue new certificate to the person
eAtitied thereto.
MORE PETITIONS.
AUGUSTA, Me-, Dec. 2S.-Numerous petit
tions we're forwarded to Gov. Garcelon to-
night, praying that be will refer oil matters
in dispute touching tie election of members
of the legislature to the supreme judicial
court. Bangor sent five large petitions, en-
bracirg in ell 5S7 names, Including men in
all professions and caliings. Many Demo.
Gratis and Greenbackers signed the
petitions. Portland sends three strong
petitions, a9gregating 496 names, en-
embracing large proportion of prominent
names IN the city. Hon. Wm. L, Putnsm.
with Emery Ridlow, serd petitions differently
worded from the others, bat 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
lege, and representatives of ell churches,
send similar uetitienR