The Republican journal., 1886-03-25
The Ward Two Contested Election Case.

]
ball. who it is alleged is resident of ward one
and the vote of Ansel 5. Kelley added, making Mr.
Pitchers vote 49, Mr.. Thompson commended tina
for ineligible persons should be treate'
blanks and that the counting of scattering votes
did not apply to municipal elections In regard t,
the adjournment of the election Mr.. Thompson
said the warden. whose office is similar to that of
moderator Of town, was the only person VIII,
could legally adjourn the meeting. 1t twas not con
tended that the warden adjourned the meeting
but the clerk, which his side denied Mr.. Craig
the warden in his affidavit siadsthat L. IL. Murcl
moved to adjourn, but he. Craig suggested tina
the motion ought not to be put until the vote wa
declared, when Mr. Murch withdrew the motion
and did not afterwards renew it. Mr.. Thompson
then read the opinion of Mr. \. =. Gould, of Thorn
aston. Mr.. Gould said the certificate the only
competent testimony of elections; that it was the
duty of the Mayor administer the cath to the per
son holding the requisite certificate and that tn,
seated contestant participate in the deberaton
and even vote for himself if he chooses hut for til,
delicacy of the situation Mr. q. advised that he re
frain from doing In 1877 the law governing
the election of Governor, senators and Representa-
tives changed but not the law governing mu
nicipal elections. Those laws remain as before
Under the law of municipal elections the duty o
the warden and clerk is scattering Il.
blanks The check list is only directory and not
essential. Legal voters whose names were omitted
from the list either by accident design should be
counted, and Illegal votes should be thrown out by
the Aldermen.
Mr.. Fogler council for Mr.. T. W. Pitcher, then
addressed the board. He took the ground that
IIaney was not elected on March Sth by the records
made and returned by the ward officers The re
turn was correct one of the votes cast by the
cheek list. There were 3ll votes cast, of which
l56 is majority. Haney received but l55 votes
Col foglcr reviewed the statement that check lists
were not essential. The statutes provides that
cheek lists of legal voters shall be made foI
municipal elections, and that wardens shall be
governed by said lists A voter has a duty to per.
form in order to exercise his franchise. A list of
voters is posted i'll the town The Aldermen meet
on three days before the election 10 revise such
lists. When the list is prepared by the proper
officers and goes into the hand of the ward officers
they shall be governed by such lists The ward
officers have right to return a vote unless the
voters name is ON the list. If Il person neglects
To have his name placed on the voting list he is
DISTINGUISHED for that election. Col Fogler claimed
ed 1t is not for the clerk warden to say who is
eligible. 1t is not their business He read from
the statute, Chapt 4, b, where it says i'll any
election," (Which applies to municipal as well as
state election@) such scattering votes shall he
counted. Col. Fogler then discussed the status of
Mr.. IIancy. He given the seat a certificate
of the ward clerk which does not agree with the
record. Cases were cited in the Garcelon count
,l,,l ln,,
certificates which did not agree with the records,
and when the Judges came to pass upon it they
said emphaticalv that the record was the evidence
and not the certificate. How far you 90 be
hnd the returns is question of law, said Mr..
Fogler. The vote Of W. III. Baker was challenged
and his name was written across the back OF it
That vote is identified and properly before the
board. Beyond that vote you have no right to put
Your hand into the ballot box. Where are YOU go
ing to stop? To open the door in this manner is
fraud. The only vote that can be excluded in the
election is Bakers, if he is found to be minor
There is precedent for such action in the 50
years Maine has been state If Hanlon's vote is
counted Kelley must be. The speaker contendcd
that Gordon and Fahy whose names We're not on
the check list, not entitled to vote. He cited
acase i'll Boston where man whose name was not
the voting list sued the warden because the
latter refused to receive his vote The court non
suited the man. Gordon and Fahy by their own
neglect DISTINGUISHED themselves by not going he
fore the proper tribunal and having their names
added to the voting list. Mr. Foger said the duty
of the ward officers when they found there was no
election was to adjourn the meeting. If there is
no election the law presumeS that the meeting is
adjourned whether or not the ward officers so
declare it several witnesses testify that Conant,
the ward clerk, stood up in chair and in Il loud
voice adjourned the meeting, declaring there was
choice for Alderman. Craig, the warden, SAYS
he did not adjourn the meeting. but does not say
the Clerk did not. Mr.. Fogler said if the clerk
adjourned the meeting in the presence of the
warden, and he did not object, it became the act Of
the warden lie then reviewed the action of the
voters at the special election on Tuesday March
9Th. which is familiar to our readers and said Mr..
Pitcher was legally elected He questioned the
Mayors authority to say who was elected alder
man, and asked if Il ward clerk could elect an
Alderman, If ne can, it is of no use to hold an
election.
At the close of the arguments Alderman Dunton
submitted the following:
81 move that AN expression of the beard be taken
Charles W. Haney, acting Alderman, of ward Two,
and for that purpose the Mayor put to the board
the following question. shall Charles W. Haney,
acting Alderman for ward two, be unseated:"
Alderman Hall moved to suspend and go into
joint convention. Not entertained
Alderman Brown appealed to the Mayor to have
Alderman Dunton's motion modified, through
courtesy to himself and Alderman Hall, as they
i;
man.
Mr.. Dunton considered Haney had as good Il
right to the seat a. himself on Brown and had been
so recognized by the Mayor He insisted on his
motion.
Alderman Hall renewed his objections to Mr..
lIaney and said nasmuch as he had had to submit
to unjust things he might well submit to this.
Alderman Brown moved as "a substitute for Al
dcrman Dunton's motion to vote whether Mr.
Pitcher or Mr. Haney SHOULD have the seat His
motion was not entertained. The yeas and nays
were then called on Mr.. buttons motion.
leas-Messrs. Dunton, Haney and Mason.
Nays-Messrs Brown and Hall, with Il protest
against Mr.. llaney's voting Oh the question.
When MIR. llaney voted on the question relating
to himself, Mr.. lIalldenounced the proceeding and
stated that he understood that Mr.. Haney would
not vote matters relating to himsefand reterat-
ing his charge that Mr.. IIaney being illegally
forced on to the board.
The Mayor then put the question
'Shall Charles W. Haney, acting Alderman of
Ward p be unseate,l?''
Mr.. Haney asked to be excused from voting, and
Mr.. Dunton voted to excuse him.
The yeas and nays being called the vote was re-
corded as follows:
Nays-Messrs. Dunton and Mason.
lcas-Messrs Brown and Hall.
The Mayor announced the vote not carried.
motion
THAT inasmuch as Thomas W. Pitcher has been
duly elected Alderman of ward Two he is entitled
to seat at this board, and that he be seated"
The Mayor refused to entertain the motion but
subsequently entertained and put it. The yeas and
nays were called for, Mr.. Haney being excused.
The vote:
Ieas-MessrS Brown and Hall.
Nays-Messrs. Dunton and Mason.
The Mayor declared the vote not carried.
Adjourned to Friday at o'clock p. m. to go into
joint convention.
A New Railroad SUIT.
On saturday writ was served on the clerk and
treasurer of the Belfast and Moosehead Lake X.
II. Co.. to compel the directors divide the rental
agreeable to the by laws. The suit is a bill in