The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1890-10-04
ACCESSORIES, NOT CANvAssERs.

proved themselves the ready and I'M
scrupulous tools Of men moro unscrupu-
lous than themselves. They refused to
include in the returns from Silver Bow
the duly certified votes OF precinct "a.
They did SO on grounds that were f1imsy,
contrary to law, precedent and reason.
We have proved it to the very hilt. Not
one iota of proof has the other side
brought forward in reply to our chal-
lenge. They profess to entertain sus-
picions, and for them that is enough.
Proof is what we demand.
On the date of their adjournment the
county board had taken no lawful &C.
ton. Their miserable travesty of JUS
tice was brought to speedy conclusion
by the service upon them Of a mandate,
returnable on the 25th of October The
proceedings which followed resulted in
peremptory mandate issuing on the 31st
OF October. The writ was served on
Nov. Z. The board retreated from it's
untenable position, performed it's legal
duty, and the returns from Silver Bow
were complete on that date.
Meantime the second act of this
gigantic fraud, concocted on the night
Of election, was being hurried to con-
clusion in Helena. The territorial board,
whose duties, it cannot be disputed,
were purely clerical, not judicial, met
and organized on the 31st Of October
All three members We're republicans
The statute empowered them to can
vass, not votes, not pol; lists, but the re-
turns from the county boards. Outside
Of that duty they had no legal right to
step so much as hairs breadth. Out
side Of that duty their acts are binding
upon no man.
They did not canvass the returns
from Silver Bow, and for the best of
reasons. They did not have those re-
turns before them when they put their
names to their deliverance or finding.
Their whole procedure was sham and
a mockery. They were masked in the
forms of law and trampled under foot
all lawful authority. They admit, in their
own dellverance, that, when they met
on the thirty first day of October, they
had received no duly certified returns
from Silver Bow. They sent special
messenger for them. We need no better
proof than this, their own statement,
that on the 31st they were not in posi-
ton to issue any complete finding. They
could not get them, they complain
Naturally. The returns from that coun-
ty were not complete until the 7th Of
November, when the board, in compli-
ance with the order OF the court, did
what it should have done more than three
weeks before. So they proceeded in
haste-their hurry will be better under
stood presently-to ascertain and de.
clare the Silver Bow returns 'from the
best sources Of information obtain
able"
It is simply monstrous, this contempt
of law and duty. Will any upright man
declare that this board was clothed with
authority to canvass the results in Sill
YER Bow upon information other than
the returns Of the county board? Was
this the action OF honest men? They
had no returns. They nigh. have certi-
fed that under the returns they could
not say who was elected, and by SO do
ing they would have retained the re-
spect OF decent men. But no. The
party lash was whistling over their
heads, and, it the real truth were told,
it is more than probable they had
sneaking liking for their degrading
task. Such colossal height of impu-
dence as theirs renders the Eiffel tower
nonenity.
They proceeded to state that they had
the official certificate Of the county clerk,
giving the returns, including precinct
"a. This is on the 4th of November, be
it noted. II that we're so, if they had
such an official certificate, it was their
bounden duty to proceed with their
arithmetical function and declare the re-
suit. But the sum total would not
have suited them. It would have re-
turned five democratic members from
Silver Bow, and they were three repub-
licans. They had plan of escape. I'VE
have before US an official notice." They
udu Oh OluCtdA uOVlCo OelOI0 CO0m. IL
had come from the county clerk and
told OF the illegal action Of the county
board on the 14th OF October. The para
graph we quote from bears the marks of
the men who composed it. It is in
tended to mislead. They desired it to
be inferred that this letter came with
the abstract OF votes on the day they
met, October 31st. That was not the
truth. The letter had been sent them
on the 21st of October, ten days before
the receipt OF this abstract of votes. The
county official wrote to explain the de-
lays which had stood in the way OF his
making the returnA The whole paltry
trickery OF the scheme is laid bare. The
pablo were to suppose that with the alb
stract OF votes came q statement from
the county clerk that the returns Of pre-
oinct 81 were Illegal And the honest
49, ispss ----s..s.. ),