Pawtucket tribune. (Pawtucket, R.I.) 1890-189?, 1892-07-20
THE QUO WARRANTO." /"
Decision May Be Reach
ed Saturd ~.
A REVIEW OF THE CASE.
What the Court Said in Reply to the
What the Court Said in Reply to the
Demurrer of Mayor Carroll.

Inc present term OF tnc Supreme SOuft
will adjourn Saturday next, and there
seems to be an opinion that before the
| adjournment the Court will render a de-
| cision In the quo warranto case against
Mayor Carroll of this city.
A brief review of the matter may inter-
est those who have not kept track Of the
various phases OF this long drawn out
struggle.
The election was held as provided by
law on Tuesday, November 3, and accord
ing to the official count Hugh J. Carroll
received 1 ,S27 votes, David J. White ,302
votes and Albert r. Sherman 1,01S votes.
A'second election wasordered for We'd
nesday, November Is, when 1t again re-
suited In no choice the figures being:
Carroll, 1874; Sherman, 1881 y White,
952.
The next election was set for December
2, and again resulted In a failure 10 elect.
The figures at that time stood; Carroll,
1927; Sherman, 1857; White, 57l. By
those figures Mr.. Carroll lacked only q
couple of votes of an election and the
Aldermen were so thoroughly disgusted
with the long drawn out battle that, in
answer to a great popular demand, a Sat
urday election was ordered to be held on
December 5, 1891. Some question was
raised as to its legality but that was
brushed aside.
Some OF the active Sherman men how
ever, stationed themselves at the polling
booths and used every effort to induce ali
they could TO refrain from voting In order
to show by the small vote cast that the
people did not know the election was in
progress.
The result was that Hugh j. Carroll re-
ceived 215O votes, Albert r. Sherman s47,
and David J. White 273 votes, the friends
OF the last named quite generally going
over TO the support of Mr.. Carroll.
This vote while it showed a falling of
OF 964 from the Wednesday previous, was
like the handle OF a jug-all. on one side.
| The vote of Mr.. Carroll steadily increased
at each trial, from 1927 on November 3,
| 1914 on November IS, 2127 on December2,
to 215O on the last and decisive day on
December s.
The Board OF Aldermen counted the
votes, arriving at the result named above,
and declared Hugh j.. Carroll elected
Mayor by 1919 majority.
Mayor Carroll was duly inaugurated
Jan. a, assumed the duties of the Office,
presided over the Board OF Aldermen at
the meeting that day, and appointed the
committees (but those committee the
Board has steadily refused to rccognize).
On the eveping Of that day Deputy Sheriff
10,
OF quo warranto, commanding him to ap-
pear before the Supreme Court on We'd
nesday, January 6, at 10 o'clock and show
by what authority he was performing the
duties OF Mayor of Pawtucket. Mayor
Carroll appeared before the Court by coun-
sci and the case was at last before the
Court. A demurrer to the plea Of the pc
titioners was filed and the Court took the
case into consideration. On Saturday,
February 8, the Court banded down a re-
script overruling the demurrer and sus-
tanning the opinion that the words
"another election" in the charter mean
a new election, and therefore require
seven days notice. The rescript also says:
at may easily be imagined that after
two contested elections which resulted in
failures to elect, political feeling and en-
thusiasm would be at a high pitch, and
that electors Of every shade OF opinion
would the alert and that, therefore,
a less no,..e than that prescribed by Sec.
IA would amply suffice to obtain full ex-
preston Of the popular will. As the only
purpose of giving notice is to obtain such
an expression we are not prepared to hold
that IL 1t should be made to appear by
return on the writ, that the electors had
full knowledge OF the election held on
Dec. 8, 1891, and that a full expression of
the popular will had thereby obtained,
that the election so held was void not
withstanding the fact that the prescribed
notice was not given"
Mayor Carroll and his friends, and al
most the entire people OF this city, felt
that the case was then practically settled
and that nothing further would be heard
from 1t. Some Of the petitioners however,
deemed ii wise to go ahead further and on
Saturday, April 30, the case was again be-
fore the Court, when the briefs OF counsel
on both sides were presented and the
Court held the matter for adviscment.
Now il is anticipated that the dicision
will be rendered next Saturday as the
Court adjourns on that day.