The sun. [volume] (Morris, Stevens County, Minn.) 1882-1895, 1888-11-15
CLAIM they WERE LIBELLED.
The Members Of the Hancock Board OF
Election eScspt 10 j Criticism that
appeared In these columns
last week.
THE sun PROMISED AL,eEL SUR.


The Editor Of THE Sun is in receipt
of the following communication:
Hancock, Mimi, Nov. 9th, '88.
EDITOR THE SUM-
In your issue of today You have an
article stating that the judges of
election, allowed any and all Repnb.
licans to vote, and allowed no DEM
ocrats to vote that could be prevented,
In Hancock; at least. this Is the sub.
stance of the article.
Between NOW and the next issue of
your paper you will have ample time
to ascertain the truth or falsity OF
this assertion. We, members of the
hoard will allow you the privilege of
correcting this statement and DENYING
same in your next Issue, 1t this
retraction is not made at time stated
suit will be begun against your paper
at once. Respy.
s. STEWART,
One Of the Judges of Election.
X. C. HKLGEsoN.
r. S. FENToN.
ALBERT WALDRON.
Clerk of Election.
A. ]. ERICKSON.
Clerk OF Election.
The following communication,
which appeared in The Suns
columns last week, is the article
which contains the matter for which
we are to be treated with SUIT for
libel at once ii retraction is not made:
DEMOCRATS SHOULD INVESTIGATE.
Hancock. Nov. Z, 'Ss.
Things went to me D--l here to-
day for you and our party generally.
The republicans had full swing; they
voted who they pleased and refused
who they pleased. They let one man
vote here to-day that rented farm
and moved his family into Pope Co.
two months ago, and another man
that rented farm in the town of
Horton and moved his family and
household goods Oh to it week or ten
days ago.
They would not let any of Bucklin's
crew vote, only. one, that was known
to he good solid Republican.
ihNVStiSotO4tiASc
matter and find out if cur Republican
friends have the right to go ovefilto
Pope county for votes. -
There is nothing whatever in the
above which points to or reflects in
any way upon any official action of
the judges of the Hancock election.
They are too sensitive. ANY wrong
done them in all that IA Voter"
says exists only in their imagination,
and not in fact; hence, we have no
retraction to make, as there is
nothing to letract. Nevertheless.
we have made use of the ample time
so kindly given us to inquire into the
matter and upon information
obtained from honorable and reliable
citizens Of that locality we entertain
serious doubts as to the entire legality
of the Hancock election.
In venturing this assertion we
wish 1t distinctly understood that we
impute no dishonest or dishonorable
motives to the judges Of election at
Hancock. or any of them, in any of
their decisions. We are personally
well acquainted with each one of
them, and we have no reason to
believe any of them to be other than
honorable gentlemen.
At the same time it is likely that
any one of our informants. (all of
whom were at the Hancock polls on
election dav) can, as private citizens.
form as correct opinions AS to the
qualifications of doubtful voter as
any of these gentlemen can as
judges of the election. We have in
our possession the written statements
of others referring to the alleged
illegality of the Hancock election in
more emphatic terms than does "a
Voter"
There is difference of opinion;
that's all.
1t will be news to- the people to
learn that there is one board of cleo
ton, land thatat Hancock, Stevens caun
ty, Minnesota. the members of which
imagine themselves upona higherplaln
of perfection than any court of justice
in the United States, anil who would
make it an offtnse to differ with them
in opinion.
In conclusion, gentlemen of the
Hancock board, we have only to say
that it is ou1 opinion that TIE Sun
has done you no wrong; if you
are anxious to prove the untruth of
the assertions made by Our cores
pendent you are at liberty tu fire
away.
Richard cote,