Santa Fe daily New Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1885-1897, 1889-01-05
THE CONTESTED SEAT
The Senate Hears Reports in the Prich-
ard-Veeder Oase-Beef
Inspection.
The Taos Contest in the House Tabled
Till Notwithstanding up
to a P. NJ.
SENATE.
FRIDAYS AFTERNOON SESSION.


House bill No. 2, Judge Webster's bill
to establish the county seat of San Juan,
was called up and twice read under a sus-
pension Of the rules,
Mr.. Gusdorf asked to have it placed
upon its passage. Mr.. Jaramillo wanted
the bill referred to the committee on
privileges and elections, and Mr.. Gusdorf
Withdrawing his motion, this was agreed
to. The house joint resolution No. 3,
provided for rewriting the full section
when any amendment to any existing
law Is desired, was, on motion OF MIR.
Catron, sent to the committee on rules.
The governors message was then taken
up, and on Mr.. Catron's motion was re-
ferred to the president for reference in
parts to such committees as the president
may deem proper.
Adjourned to 10 o. III.
SATURDAY MORNINGS SESSION.
AT 10 this morning the senate met and
after prayer by the chaplain adjourned on
motion of Mr.. Perea to 2 p. M, in order
that the committees may have chance
to catch up with their rapidly increasing
work.
Mr.. Dolan, of Lincoln, has introduced
bill providing for inspection of all beef
sold in the New Mexico markets. The
bill is now in the hands of the committee
on agriculture, of which Mr.. Baca, of So
zorro, is chairman.
This bill recites that no person shall
offer for sale, handle or give away any
beef until the same shall have being
examined and inspected while the animal
or animals are alive and on foot. This
law shall apply alike to meat markets,
hotel and restaurant keepers, or their en-
poyees. For violations the punishment is
to be fine of not less than $50, nor more
than $500, or Imprisonment in the county
jail not less than days, nor more than
three months.
The governor is authorized to appoint
an inspector for every town or village
having over $50 inhabitants, whose duty
it shall be to inspect all cattle about to be
killed for human food. If any person
shall slaughter beef pronounced unsound
or unhealthy by the inspector severe
punishment is provided. The law is not
to affect the rights Of any person to pur.
chase and kill cattle for their own use o,
their own cattle. Inspectors are to re
ceive 70 cents per head for.inspectlon, and
any person reporting violation OF the
law shall receive Il reward in the shape OF
one half OF the fine inflicted by the justice
OF the peace.
THIS AFTERNOONS SESSION.
The senate came to order at p. m.
Mr.. Perea, chairman of the committee
on privileges and elections, presented the
committees report in the contest case
from San Miguel county, of Prchard VS.
Needer. Mr.. Franks, of the same com.
mittee, presented minority report. Both
documents were read.
The majority report sets forth that in
certain precincts large number of ballots
were destroyed, leaving the Republicans
without ballots at these precincts that
in northern San Miguel county many re-
sidents of Mora county came across the
line and voted for Contestee Veeder; that
in southeast San Miguel people residents
of Texas came into San Miguel county
and voted for Veeder, thereby largely
swelling his vote as against the
contestant, Prichard that at least one pre-.
cinct in the county regularly established
was abolished by the Democratic county
authorities for political purposes, with Il
view to working detriment to the contest.
ant, and then the report goes into all the
voluminous details, reciting infinitely how
tho line between San Miguel and Mora
counties was established, how it was re.
surveyed, according to the statute 'S2, for
the purposes of substantiating the state
ments set forth in this report that ~
Mora county residents voted for Veeder,
and specifies the testimony taken on this
subject. The report further sets out and
names l53 voters who were unregistered
and who cast illegal ballots for Veeder,
which ballots should never have
been counted for any one. 1t is
specified also that parties were unnat-
uraized, and those W no had no residence
in the precincts when they voted, and al
so people who had but three days previous
to the election arrived from Arizona, were
all allowed to vote for Veeder, Willie on
the other hand, Republican voters were
not allowed to cast their ballots. In pre-
cinct No. 7, number of Republican
voters were arrested by deputy marshals
and deprived of their liberty; that this
fact is not denied by contestee; that dep
uty marshals carried with them certiti-
Gates which were filled out and given
to people not entitled to vote.
The report states that in the opinion
of the committee the contestee has not
proved any illegal votes cast for con-
testant, Prichard, save, possibly in one
precinct, where some eight residents
were permitted to vote who had not been
registered. The report then sets forth
that according to the contestee's own
showing this contest has resulted in re-
ducing his, Veeders majority to only five,
where he has all along claimed ma
jority of ninety; that the committee
finds, after sitting the evidence, that Mr..
Prichard received u clear majority over
Mr.. Veedcr OF tifty-three votes, and the
report concludes with resolution setting
forth that Mr. Prichard be given the seat
held by Mr.. Needer.
Mr. Franks presented aminori'y report.
This document contends that the notice
of contest was defective in that contestant
did not set forth a single name OF those
alleged to have voted illegally: that the
Nora San Miguel line as shown to exist
by the majority report is not the correct
line, according to maps of Kingman, the
United States postal service, and Hart
mann; that if the law of 1872 defining this
line is followed it would show the forty
seven votes in question to be residents of
San Miguel county. The report goes into
all the intircacies Of the contest and
makes several comparisons, admittingun-
registered voters cast their ballots for the
contestee, but charging similar irregular
tiles against contestant and holding that
Veeder's majority over Prichard is forty
three.
At p. m. the senate invited both Mr.
Prichard and Mr.. Veeder to present their