The Neihart herald. [volume] (Neihart, Mont.) 1890-1901, 1892-10-29
ABOUT PERCINCT 81
The Plain Unvarnished facts Taken
From the Record-Read and
Know for Yourself.
TO THE VOTERS OF MONTANA.
A Disgraceful Fraud Exposed-The
History of Precinct
81.

|
through its platform, editors an
speakers, reports the charge tha
the republican party elected Sena
tors Sanders and Power through tn
unjust rejection of the vote cast a
precinct No. 81, of Silver Bow coun
ty, in 1889. "Fraud" and "theft'
are words which they use in refer
ring to the subject. Base attack
are made upon the officers no wer'
compelled by law in the performance
of their duties to reject this vote
The rank and file of the Democrat,
party are told that an honest vot,
was polled at precinct "a, ant
thrown out arbitrarily and five demo
Gratis were deprived of their seats il
the Legislature.
But what are the facts? Thi.
question was involved in the law
suit between two candidates fol
sheriff in Silver Bow county, and the
Supreme court of the State founC
that gross frauds had been commit
ted by the election officers at pre-.
cinct "a, and that the returns were
DISHONEST and FRAUDULENT, and
could not for these reasons be count
ed. This case, Lloyd VS.. Sullivan.
can be found in Volume 8 of the
Montana Reports, page 277. The
facts which are given in this case
are never talked of by democratic
orators. This is a summary, and
this statement cannot be denied:
There should have been five judg-
es and two clerks of the election at
precinct "a. Every provision of law
upon this point was ignored, and the
clerks did nothing. Two Judges
were not appointed to fill vacancies,
and two of the three judges Penny
cook and Morrison-performed the
l,,tioc of tl,o co,o,, N; oo,c T,Jr.o
Mediation, a well-known democrat,
found as a fact ''That A. n. Ander-
son and Thomas O'Keefe, who were
sworn as clerks of election at said
precinct "a, performed none of the
clerical work thereat, but all the
clerical work was performed by the
Judges, and principally bp Penny
cook"
Anderson, one Of the clerks, sign
ed the returns ''the second or third
night after election,'' at the hour of
and the other clerk signed
Pennycook went to Butte alter
the vote at precinct "a had been
and came back before he
asked the clerks to sign the returns.
He then made another visit and
delivered the returns to the County
Clerk. Upon the first visit Of Pen
nycook 1t was known that the cleo
ton was close and might depend
upon the vote of this precinct.
Why didn't Pennycook take the re-
turns with him upon his first trip?
".
No citizen ever saw one ballot
taken from the ballot box of pre-
cinct 81, or heard it read, or tailed.
This remark cannot be truly made of
any other precinct in the state of
Montana.
V.
Pennycook and Morrison canvased
he vote privately. when the statute
says, "The canvass shall be public" "
Two democrats, Thomas McCann
md Dennis O'Neil, and two other
John Wilson and Charles
ONO, testified that the door of the
public place was locked and no one
was allowed to be present when
Pennycook and Morrison was inside
the vote. Who ever
leard of such conduct upon the part
IF election officers elsewhere in Mon
ana?
The certificate of returns is not
lccording to law. The names of the
officers were transposed SO that the
clerk did not certify and the Judges
lid not attest the number of voter.
VII.
The poll book of precinct "a
shows that the citizens voted as fol- |
ows: Three judges, two clerks and
he rest in al phabetical order from
[ohn A. Anderson to Robert Young
,erg, ia in all.
VIII.
The off ,ial ballot had two candi-
lates for office and two votes upon
he constitution, SO that each voter
lad "a votes. According to the re
urns Ia voters cast 1908 Yates,
which was the extent of their ri ght,
md no one missed candidate from
Governor down to constable. No
,recinct in Montana, however small,
AN show such perfect vote under
he Australian system, which requlr-
$ mark to be placed opposite the
lame of each candidate.