St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1886-06-02
ALDERMANIO CONTESTS.
The Council Debates the Long-Rob-
bins Fight For Seat.
Mr.. Croonquist Alleges Fraudulent
Votes Cast in His District.

two contests for aldermanic honors, at its
session last night. A somewhat lengthy
debate was had on the Long Robbins con-
test in the Seventh, but no action was
taken further than to defer the settlement
OF it until Friday night. The notice
OF the Croonquist-Kenny contest was
simply filed for future reference
When the roll was called, the clerk called
the name of Mr.. Long. Mr.. Robbins i'm
mediately objected, and requested that his
name be placed upon the roll instead of
that OF Mr.. Long. President Smith said he
did not think it proper to put his name
there before the question was settled. MI
Robbins said that the returns OF the judges
gave him the election, and that his name
should be placed on the roll. and then if
there was any contest it could be made by
the other party i'll the regular way. He
only asked to be treated according to law
Aid. Starkey thought the question was
one to be decided by this council. He did
not know that this matter was clearly laid
down in the law or it could be quickly set
tied by the city attorney. He did not
think that there was any individual wish to
to deprive either Aid. Long or Mr.. Rob-
bins of his rights. He moved that COM
mittee of five be appointed to consider the
claims of both gentlemen. Mr.. Sanborn
said he had another plan to suggest The
first question to be decided was whether
there was legal election. He would like to
make motion that Mr.. Robbins name be
placed on the list that some alderman second
the motion and that then time be ap-
pointed for hearing when both gentlemen
could be present with their counsel. This
would amply determine whether there had
been legal election. If it was decided that
fharo fi,O,, +ha I'D.
that there was an election, Mr.. Robbins was
prima facie alderman and the contest could
be regularly made. Aid. Kerr
said he concurred with the last
speaker. He had looked the
matter carefully and thought there was one
preliminary question to decide, which was
whether there had been legal election.
He agreed with Mr.. Sanborn that all the
discussion should be had before the whole
council, for each alderman wanted to hear
the discussion before he could vote.
Mr.. Starkey insisted that the first hearing
should be before a committee. He thought
this was the proper way to have all import
ant matters which came before the council
should be determined.
III. F. Stevens obtained permission to
speak in behalf of Alderman Long and
stated that Mr.. Sanborn's motion would be
perfectly satisfactory to Mr.. Long and as
Mr.. Longs counsel he was ready to dis
cuss the question now or at any time.
Mr.. Robbins stated that he had received
no notice of contest by Mr.. Long, that
he knew not what the case proposed was.
that there seemed to be an assumption by
the council that he was the man
TO BE KEPT OUT
and had been put on the defensive when by
fa of or hn no ha
other side. He was in very unfair po-
sition and all he wanted was a fair and
honest consideration of the question.
Aid. Starkey emphatically denied any
such feeling as Mr. Robbins attributed to
the council. The committee of the old
council to whom the matter was referred
had desired fair hearing on both sides.
The question had become one of law and
he insisted that the matter be referred to a
committee.
Aid. Sanborn objected to any process of
investigation carried on before five men
when fifteen men had to decide the matter.
If he was in the place of either Mr.. Long
and MI. Robbins he would insist on being
heard before the tribunal which had author
ity. The first question to be determined
and he believed the only one was, whether
there had been an election. He hoped the
motion to refer to committee would not
prevail.
Aid. Kerr thought Mr.. Robbins slightly
Inexperienced the question. This was
not an ordinary contest of election, but
question simply of whether Mr.. Long was
elected for two years or one. upon which
the council had authority to decide without
reference to either Mr.. Long or Robbins
He offered a substitute to the effect that the
question be determined at some future
meeting. This substitute was unanimously
adopted. and the date was fixed at 1880
o'clock Friday evening, June 4, and it was
determined that when the council adjourn
it be to that time. In reply to a question
of Mr.. Robbins, Mr.. Stevens stated that ne
understood that the only question to be
argued at the time mentioned would be the
one of law, whether there had been an
election OF not.
ANOTHER CONTEST,
The clerk then read petition from An
drew p. Croonquist, contesting the election
of Terrence V. Kenney-the First alder
manic district of the Fifth ward. Mr..
Croonquist's petition states that the votes at
the election were wrongfully and unlaw-
fully miscounted and enormously reported;
that one johnson, first name unknown,
Lars l.. Imberg, III. Nelson, Claus Ander-
son, B. S. Wholstrom and others, legal res
idents of his aldermanic district were re-
fused permission to vote by the judges of
election at the Third precinct; that
Otto ALL and others were refused per-
mission to vote at the same place; that one
O'Reilly fraudulently voted at the election,
as did c. f. Robb, Peter Brown and others,
that all the ballots cast for Terrence V.
Kenney had written and printed on them
certain cuts, printed matter and devices
contrary to law. among other things being
the words Democratic ticket; that at no
precinct in his aldermanic district were
there any legally authorized judges or clerks
of election; that the judges failed to certify
the returns according to law; that large
number of votes were cast for Terrence V.
Kenney by men not citizens of the United
States. He asked that all these questions
be investigated and determined by the
council, and that he be declared elected
a. &c