The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1889-10-13
THE FIGHT HAS BEGUN
Lively Ttsnes Promised N Case the Votes
OF Two Dissrtrts Are Thrown
Out Result of the
Count.
special tn the standard.

precincts. Az 10 o'clock his afternoon
the hoard r~e-convencd. Tho policy of the
canvassers is tn take i'm writing all obiec-
tions tai the count of the precincts. and go
on with the count, the intention bcing to
decide all cases hereafter. There 10 fear
among the democrats that the hoard will
throw ont the first ward i'm this city,
WI %h' ra,a as s Mas ~ s%G bn, ou i%-0 ~:
When precinct No. 2i-Rocker-wa~
half 'e" Of " the d e%osrat-. nisd
objections on the ground that one of the
Judge had not been appoin'ed by tn:
sworn in and that there were only three
Judges, whereas there are III voters in the
only three Judges were appointed beca,,se
according tn the vote 81 last year. only
that number was required.
When precinct No. - was reached Judge
Dixon objected tn the count on the ground
that the clerks sworc in the Judges and
that the books were only certified to by
two Judges.
.McCune's wood camp was reached at 3
o'clock thisa afternoon. Thompson Camp
count. I'll" bnoks w"r" vea'o,n,amicd by
a bundle OF afildavits of objections tn
voters. The registry clerk had taken care
posite the names of the challenged voters
the sentence, II bc challenged" Judge
Dixon claimed that this was the neglect
of the registry agent and not the fault of
the Judges. of election. The grounds of
Mr.. C~ampbcll's objection were that the
that one judge could not read or write and
had To sign his name by making "a cross.
The last precinct was reached at ;
o'clock for the purpose of listening tn the
argument an the matter of contests. Al =
o'clock the room OF the canvassing board
States Attorney Weed of Helena was
among those present: Judge w. w.
q n'1 fnir % sa"n,. T As snia. "rs.i"nS d" n 1"s
believe one objection ON either side is well
taken or TINT this board has any right tn
tn some of the prccincts simply
to protect ourselves, cau the
other s side hal naa ma; made objections; Thus in
will work both ways. II onc-hali of them
stand there will necessarily he "a complete
llsh a uniform rule. and IL one of them is
thrown out for an informally, another
must he thrown ont on the same grounds.
selves To objections made here, bat must
throw out all i'm which there is any irreg'i-
larity,: Yet l don't consider an objection
ON either hand worth entertaining. You
are not here to Judge whether thers. IL lille
Rality or irregularity; you are simply to
the proper authorities to satisfy you they
indicate the will OF the voters, and to add
them mp. No matter how informal they
IDENTITY the intention Of the voters and add
them, up. In ne state ran canvassinR
Dnartis go hHhtnd the RETURNS, and our
statutes are much narrower and leave the
board. section lGyi, page $40. reads that
turns and make abstracts OF the votes.
terial, M long as they come from the
determine tbs legality OF the voting or
whether the registry agent or judge
IF If election ,ss Statute aia Fl" os %r's; ,.rri Tas.
Whether the Judges were sworn or not il
immaterial unless il is shown that il
frS% wi,s v ,i'.y would w .ha' RnSs Ss.% %,'f TSaS
object To precinct No. X because only the
tally list was put i'm and not the total fig
ures.. Yet there is nothing to show that
thereby persons have been deprived of
voting who ought to vote: In several
cases where the figures and tallies diff
fered you have taken the tallies as your
guide. In his you had all that Was neces-
sary To show the intention of the voters,
by all along. In the ease objected to you
have t~ailies; why not take them
and make the figures. I'm other
figures from the talIies. Does IL come
down to such a point that a registry agent
ali Silver Bow by failure to- perform his
duty? Then il is not n question of cleo
ton ON votes but of what upstart will fail
To perform his duty. In reference to the
Tunnel precinct the only objection liz that
there were one or two more votes polled
than were counted. Bccausc the Judges
~ ~ ~ - y" W IN htS-
franchiscd? Not only common sense but
the decisions of the courts forbid that.
The courts say that when from the re-
turns you can tell what the vote has been.
then little irregularities will not count.
There is no statement Of any fraud"
"McS(uarrie on elections, section 2Si,
says the duty of ~canvassinH officers ia
purely ministerial. They must receive
and count the votes as presented 10y the
returns and cannot Ro behind the returns
i'm any ease. Judge Knowles. on the
bench. delivered an opinion which was
sound. although IL may not coincide with
his opinion AS republican counsel to-
night. He says the canvassiDg board has
nothing tn do hut determine the abstract
of the vote as returned tn them. They
have no other legal duties to perform, and
no authority tai go behind the returns.
Judge McQuarrie says Ia question
IL. was there a fair vote
and AN honest count. That
IL the only question; not whether
the clerks Of registry or Judges were sworn
or certified properly. IL is not OF much
consequence who counted the votes so
long as they were counted fairly. II such
informalties are tai throw out precincts,
the election is u farce. IL is no longer u
question of voters but of capturing the
dishonest or careless registry agent or
clerk. One little petty official il then
more powerful than 500 voters. The voters
have complied with every regularity of
law. They did their duty. then Let their