St. Paul daily globe., 1889-01-10
The Republican Council Com
mittee Refuses to Recount
the Votes.
A Rule for Evidence That
Does Not Work Two q
Ways.
McArdle Denied a Recount Of
the Third Ward Alderman
ic Votes.
The Same Fate Awaits the
Smith-Hunter Contest in
the Sixth. 10


Inc council cOmmlJCee appOluleu W
make an investigation of the contests
over aldermanic seats distinguished IT.
self yesterday, if an apparent unwlll-
ingnesS to allow recount to be made,
OF to show consistency in the recep-
tion of evidence, can be considered
as deserving that appellation. The
first contest taken up was that
of William McArdle, Democrat, against
George A. Durham, Republican, at the
Third ward. The official return gave
Durham a plurality of only twenty
votes. The notice of contest charged
irregularities and errors, and was backed
up by the affidavits of Philip Madden,
of the Eleventh precinct, who sWore
that to his knowledge ten or
more ballots that contained the
names of two candidates for
the four-year term had been counted.
and by j. B. McArdle, who stated that
several similar ballots in the Eleventh
precinct were counted. The morning
was consumed in hearing arguments as
to whether recount should be made.
Simon Meyers, attorney for Dunam,
claimed the committee had no right to
open the boxes or make recount un-
less more specific allegations were
made, and that the notice was defective.
grave Smith for McArdle claimed the
contrary. The committee finally went
into executive session. and consulted
City Attorney Russell. 1t was decided
that it would
LISTEN TO TESTIMONY
from the judges of the Tenth and
Eleventh precincts. James Buck,
Schult, and William Gehrity, of the
Eleventh precinct, testified that one or
two ballots Oh which pastors had been
stuck so as to make two candidates for
the four year term had been voted, but
were thrown out. Peter Rauen, Arthur
Eicharn and A. c. La Brash, judges in
the Tenth precinct, remembered two
ballots that had been counted upon
which pastors had been stuck
the testimony was finished the commit
tee again retired, and then announced
that it decided not to allow recount,
and would give its reasons for this ac-
ton to the council. In vain McArdle's
attorneys protested that they had not
finished their case. and asked the privi-
lege of subp9ning the judges Of the
other precincts. They argued that the no.
tice OF contest included the entire ward
as we'll as the two precincts, but the
committee was unmOvable, and placidly
maintained the attitude of requiring ev-
idence to warrant recount, and then
refusing to admit the evidence. The
attorneys put in a protest against the
committee deciding the contest before
the contestant had concluded his case,
and against the refusal to issue sub
p6naS to procure the attendance of wit
nesseS. This was all that could be done.
MORE OF THE SAME SORT.
The contest of James Smith. Demo-
crat, against Samuel Hunter, Re-
publican, who claims his election in the
Sixth ward by a plurality of 221 votes,
was then taken up. The nature of the
contest set up among other charges of
irregularity, is that the connt in many
precincts was not practically nOn-cOn-
tinuOusly conducted; that the ballots
were not read. and that many voters
who could not read were given
what purported to be regular Demo-
cratic tickets, but which had Hunters
ney w. P. Roberts, for Hunter, objected
that the notice was served upon the old
and not the new council. To this Attor-
ney A. N. Jordan, for Smith, retorted
that no notice was really required by
law. and all that was necessary was to
call the attention of the council to the
fact that the election was to be con-
tested. He carried his point, and then
proceeded to read supreme court
decision in the case OF O'Gorman VS..
Richter, contest over the Office of
sheriff in Ramsey county. He was in
terrupted and told that if he had any
evidence the committee would hear it,
but didn't banker for any more reading.
Ia ooh, hot fb0
would sup9na the witnesses. To the
granted, whereupon j. w. Lawrence
jumped to his feet and demanded
THE SAME PRIVILEGE
of having witnesses subp9ned in the
McArdle-Dnrnam contest. The eXpla-
nation was not made, but it was obvious
that there was quite difference in the
cases. In the Third ward the Repub-
lican candidate had narrow margin of
twenty votes, and in the Sixth ward the
Republicans had a plurality of
over 200 votes. Mr.. Jordan was
given his subpoena finally and
an adjournment of two hours to z
o'clock was taken to allow him to get
his witnesses. At that time Smith, the
mony. which confOrmed closely to his
statements in the notice of contest. He
claimed that he had driven through the
Sixth ward ON election day and
had found tickets distributed
at the various precincts which
resembled Democratic tickets,
the name of Hunter. however, being
presented instead of his. FL. H. Nc
Niven, a judge in the Second precinct.
corroborated him, and stated that IN the
Second precinct votes were counted by
tens and twenties without being read.
Adjournment was taken to 9
o'clock this morning, but it
seems to be useless effort to
continue thescontest any farther, as
the committee is not disposed to makesa
recount. One of the aldermen probably
voiced it's sentiments when he remarked
that after they had counted the votes in
the Tenth ward over, and only found
mistake of two votes, he did not pro-
pose to spend his time recounting wards
in which several thousand votes were
cast. @