The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1893-09-26
HARPER'S COUNT.
Continued from First Page.

Windham, Newell n. Chute, OF Brldgton,
EliphaIet c. Robinson, of Cape Eliz4-
beth. John Melia, of Cape Elizabeth,
David c. Mcintyre, of New Gloucester,
Nicholas Drinkwater, Of Yarmouth, Eli
a, Rogers, of Freeport, Fred W. Plum
mer, of Raymond, and Lewis H. Litch-
field. Of Brunswick. George C. Cush-
man was challenged.
The jury being selected Judge Bonney
appointed Mr.. Eliphalet G. Robinson
foreman. ~
The Indictment, a lengthy and compre-
hensive document, was next read by the
Clerk.
Then County Attorney True began his
opening address, saying;
County Attorney Trues Opening.
Most cases which come before a jury
are brought under some specific provls-
ion of statute. This is so because the
same offence is frequently of different
grade in different Jurisdictions and be-
cause, naturally, ordinary crimes are
defined and penalties provided IN every
separate sovereignty. But it cannot be
expected that every code of laws or set
of statutes will be perfect, or that
they shall provide for every offense
which men may commit. SO that prac-
tically, in every jurisdiction the statute
law provides only for the usual crimes
and their punishments, leaving those OF
a rare and unusual nature to. pc taken
care Of as they arise, by new ieglslatiocp'
or to be goyerned-in jurisdictions llkc
that of the State of Namely the prlnclF
pies of the common law. BY the COM
mon law we mean those laws when pre-
vailed in the Mother Country OF En- &
land, from which, in great measure, our
ancestors came. 1t is a lam mar lace
that when emigrants remove from an
inhabited to an uninhablted country
thew carry with them their own laws.
This was the case in the settlement OF
the United States, and our ancestors
who sailed here brought with them the
laws of England, and are governed by
them. subject only to such repeal, re-
strictions and limitations as they nave
since chosen to make by appropriate legls-
Iation And it accordingly comes ABOUT
that, along with our statutory oHences,
we have also offences which We're such
at the common law. Inc lnoictmei-o
which has Just been read In your nearing
discloses an offense at common law, ana
while the statute which have read gives
no definition of such an offense, the
penalty for committing a crime OF the
Character outlined in the Indictment is
given in the statute, and to know 9he
principle on which the case proceeds we
must turn to the books which deal WI b
such principles and see it we may find one
which meets this case. II my lnterpre-
tation he correct, we find this principle
stated in the books as follows:
/ Bish Sc. All. 1T is indictable for
q public officer in the discharge OF the
duties of his Office, to commit any fraud
whether such fraud would have been
criminal or not if committed against
private person. 3 Wharf. Or. Law, Sec.
i572 a. Stephens Dig. Or. Law, Art III.
And I understand that Stephen, IN Art.
118 correctly defines the meaning OF the
term, public officer" when he says 1t
ameans a person invested with authority
to execute any public duty, and legally
bound to do So"
That this principle in its application to
cases Of offenses at elections has been
fully recognized in this State is apparent
from an examination of the cases ofState
v, Bailey, 81 Me. 321; State v. Boyington,
SO Me. 512, and State v. Jackson, ~ Me.
81.
Bearing.in mind the principle stated,
proceed with brief summary OF what
the State expects to prove by its evil
dence.
land were held in the different wards of
the city for the choice of mayor and ward
officers. and for the determination of the
question of a change of ward lines.
Thoms r. Harper, the respondent, was
warden of Ward One in said city on that
9th day of March. Under the constitu-
tion it was his duty, as such warden
and I give the words of the constitution
-" to preside impartially at said (such)
meeting receive the votes of all quail
fed electors present, sort, count and de-
clare them, in open ward meeting, and
La the presence of the ward clerk. :.
What it means to" preside impartially"
YOU ali know, and I take its that to
asort, count and declare" the votes,
means an honest sorting, and honest
counting and an honest declaration of
the electors votes actually thrown We
shall demonstrate to this jury the fact
that the count and declaration of this
respondent was untrue in fact; we shall
prove, beyond reasonable doubt that
the count and declaration of this respon-
dent was untrue in fact; we shall prove,
beyond reasonable doubt, that the
count and declaration of the votes made
by this respondent was knowingly and
designedIy false.
Certain changes in the conduct of cleo
tions and the form of the ballots, togeth-
ar with the manner of marking the same
were introduced by the Public Laws of
1891, Go, known as the Australian Bal
lot law. DOuDJleSS Jh1S new law intro
duced more complicated style of ballot
and made the voters task harder one.
You remember thesmanner in which it
was to be IN arked:
HE may place such mark opposite the
name sPof a party or political designa-
ton, in which case he shall be deemed to
have voted for all the persons named in
the group under such party or designa-
ton: or he may place such mark oppo-
site the names of the individual candi-
dates of his choice for each office to be
filled, or he may fill in the name of the
candidate of his choice in the blank
space provided therefor and place the
mark opposite as aforesaid, in which
case he shall be deemed to have voted
only for the individual candidates oppo-
site whose names he has placed such
mark, In case of a question submitted
to the vote of the people he hall place
such mark in the appropriate margin
against the answer which he desires to
We have nothing to conceal in this
case Every fact within the knowledge
of the government will be laid before the
iury. The events of the day, the cir
cunstances attending the counting of
the vote. and the subsequent conduct of
tho roe,o,dant will he laid before Won