Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1890-08-28


machinery TO direct their labons
This mandate is 10 prevent The op,.n
ing Of the ballot box, and tn,
ascertalnmeni NJ the true result a
: the polls, AMI Is 10 command IA,
board 70 issue A certificate without
regard 20 the ballots cast.
Judge H1ne-DJ YOU understand
the writ 10 say that the board had
c4nNassed the returns. and that M
discrepancy or irrvgularity appeared
therein: ! mean no discrepancy
with regard b all the returns b,.fors
tie boar1?
Nh. Brown-lt does not say that
the returns have been uanvasst.d. but
u slys there was m discrepancy in
any one OF the re,urns-not IN ali
ihe returns before the board.
Judge Zaue-l understand that
the complaint was, in substance.
that the votes in this particular poll
/ J., FIrs, precinct, had been can
y,a-sed, and no irregularity appeared
lheneln; that II appeared thai votes
were cast Tor J. II. Runel. Jr. J.
Il. Rumel, and II. Page. 1t doe.
not show That there was no irregu-
iarity as compared with the other
{ polls.
To this vieg both sides assented.
Col. Stone said that he proposed
10 call hartman Sells 10 give evil
lence that the BOard Of Cauvassers
decided % 20 behind the returns.
Mr.. B-Own- We have no objection
u taking evidence as TO what was
done.
Judge Zlne-This matter must be
confined 10 the questions that are
,tric u proper in this proceeding.
Mr. Brown then read the answer
u the Board OF Canvassers a. pub.
i.~hed yesterday. He then ma ie an
argument, claiming that Col. Page
had no right 10 complain, for III,
B5ari Of Cauvassers had not refused
% count Tor him all the votes he had
received. They were ready anu
anxious 20 do that, But Page asked
them not 10 count for Rumel
all the votes cast for him. The
judges Of election I'm the disputed
polls hal certified that the cleo
ton was conducted according 10
the rules Of the Ulah Com
nis>i1n,' not '-accrriiug 30 law"
They made no return Il the lists r,.-
Iuired ~ law, but had only sent in |
one abstract AMI one tally sheet. on
which the names Of Henry Page
and J. II. Rumel Appeared As car
didates for 'rec0rier. The law alsJ
requires the judges % election 10 re-
turn the LalIot box 10 the county |
ranvassiug baari Though the Com
N iSiOn has appointed one board for
the whole Territory. Instead Of
complying with the law, the Com
missioner Orirrci the presiding
Judge o. keep the ballot box, anl t.
lock the pill lists in the ballot box.
instead uI forwarding it b the can
wasting board. Under the rules Of
-he UDh Commission" the judge,
r0uf0rmed 10 NJ law. They
sent au abstract which j. no; /
authorized by law, but failed
20 send tbc list provided for
10y law. Ia the First precinct, ia
.Uil ] from \ 20 l.. the votes for
r-c0rIer were certified % Ice for II.
PAGE AMI J. II. EImrl, and AZ poll |
>, from "a to-. for Henry Page anu
John II. Rum-l, Jr. This, Mr.
Brown claimel, yas Uf it-eif a SUI
icicut discrepancy 10 justify the
cRnvISsers in going b the ballot
boxes - ascertain the truth. Ii the
votes for II. Page were 10 Toe count
~ Tor Henry Page, because he wa
known % be- a candidate, for the
same reason the votes for :. IL. EI-
mel >h0uii be counted for John II.
issmel. Jr. Air. Brown presented
in extensive list Of authorities il |
support ~ his proposition, auI hold
M that .'Ir.H was merely dvScrip |
iou for VHrp1-es 81 Identification
,ud was no part Of the name u IA:
Individual.
Judge Zane sail lie understood
lac situation b Zoe tins. That thJ
edition frr writ % uisnitt. -,
ORR r'l'iily ss.-s we're cast for Jup.
u. hum,l, Jr-. J. II. RIm-l anu
Henry Page Tor recorder. that In,
lr, sumption j. rliacI 10y the .JE.'
hat there j. another J. ~. Numel:
hat T. THIS petitioner a Ids the pul-
that J n. Rull resides ;
% the county and l. q guil
lei voter. an that Else ballot
.h1Uii bH counted as for differ
M V-r-3us. In the absence
q proof OF tb-se f,als, the ia i-e had ,
IN impression that the presumptions
lgt-i might De overcome by pre-.
arising from the fact that
{ Wss , matter II plhli. uD,0riety
hat John II. Rlm.l, Jr., was thu
.andiiate for recorder; that all but
.hrge Of f0Tty-one polls ia the county
-8.cI trr Eim, without any vote :
or !. T. kumel; and further.
In. wh-re one First precinct
soil. embracing the letters 4
D l.. the votes we're for J. II. | !
}Imci, while at the other Tcll. ~
% Z ayrrcI with thirly seven other
lb,ls. aal returned vute- for Johi !
n. EImyl. Jr. ON iae psiu, Is &
this was sHcha discrepancy
Is % agtnoriz. tie board . 20
h- ballot box, he would express n
opinion.
MIR. Brown said he had the judy,
4 election here, who would testify | ,
hat the omission Of '-Jr.r after Mr.. !
fumel's name. was merely a.
omission. aul that the votes were
actually Tor J. Il. Rumel, Jr.
Elijah Sells was tiie fir.t witness
wanted, hut as he was not present
Judge Judd was examined.
Mr.. Br1wn-What Rumel do the :
e,urns from thirty-eight precincts !
dow was voted for
This question was strcnulusly Oh
ectei d on different grounds, by :
.Bunsel for tine pliiuiiT. 4 pro
Jngei argument enSued, in which n
10 the attorneys on the y
as took part. Judge Loot :
DJrJggb, In the course o, i
- rcmarSs. declared the issue '
4 this whole proceeding b be: Dill
here appear, upon the face Of the 8.
eturus, such a discrepancy Is gave :,
o the board. under the law. author !
ty % resort % aud count the ballots?
The plaintiff holds that such a
discrepancy dir not exist, and that
me b1aul had not. therefore, the !
light o. open the ballot box and !
cunt the votes. The fact that some :
4 the r-tuTns showed that ]. II. | :
lumel Wa v0icl for. while otner-
hDwei that J. II. Rlmcl Jr. was a :
'1udi late, Was rot, the counsel for
illiutil held, 4 DISCREPANCY.
This argument was in progress
when we Weut 90 press. I
AGAINST OPPRESSIVE TAXES. !
l Siroa= Movement In Favor OF /
I i--hfnrir,.. Inc pnrrIrr R-rI...