The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1893-03-08

we hereby protest against your said body can
yasslng the returns as made from sald ware.
demand that your said board proceed TO make
a legal count of said vote as cast.
WALTER I. LEFAvoR,
JAMES c. KENT
When this protest was presented
Alderman Gallagher said: Il move that
the aldermen proceed"
They did proceed, whereupon Alder
man Josselyn took the protest and pre-
sented it.
The chairman-"What action shall we
take?n
Alderman Gallagher-"I move we
take no action on it,
Alderman Guptill--Last fall the ques-
ton arose as to whether we could go be-
hind the returns Geo. M. Seiders and
Judge Symonds came in and said we had
no right to go behind returns. Our
simple duty was to tabulate.
Aldermen Gallagher-''I do not think
we should discuss the matter
Alderman Josselyn-We might accept
this protest and put it on file"
! Alderman Gallagher-'I move that it
do not be received; that we do not have
anything to do with it,
So the protest was not received, and
the returns were accepted from Ward 3.
The circumstances of this councilman
vote are so remarkable, and it is such a
glaring instances of counting out, that
they may be reproduced.
For first councilman, Mr.. Lyman Cous-
ms (Rep). had a majority, receiving $40
votes to 571 for Hicks, the highest Dem
ocrat. The other two Republican candi-
dates for councilmen, Messrs. Kent and
Lefavor had clear majorities also, but
the Democrats have made use of pecu-
liarcondition to,declare that these two do
not have majorities. This is the condi-
ton. Twenty-four ballots were not
marked on the councillors vote, that is,
they were blanks. Kent had 591 votes,
the highest Democrat had ST., and the
highest prohibitionist had IA; ST. plus IA
is 5S5, which is nine less than Kent's vote.
Kent, therefore had a majority over all
his competitors.
But the Democratic warden reasons
thus: He says that there were 1907 of the
Australian ballots thrown. A majority of
this is 604, hence they say that neither
Kent nor Lefavor has a majority. The
Democratic aldermen. on the face of
such returns, which were manifestly
wrong on their face, refused even to adj
init the protest! The other wards having
been read, the chairman announced that
sDarius Fl. Ingraham has been elected
by majority of 25.''
Alderman Rogers moved that the city
clerk be requested to notify Darius Ell.
Ingraham of his election.
The yeas and nays were taken on this,
all the Democrats voting s'yes'' and Mr..
Josselyn voting 'sno'' Thus the Demo-
cratic aldermen declared themselves fl
nally in favor of doing nothing to inves-
tigate the frauds i'm Ward 1.
After the board adjourned, Messrs.
John York and v. Richard Foss applied
to City Clerk Russell toinspect the Ward
/ check list in his presence, but permits
sion was refused. The check list would
have shown whether the whole number
of ballots thrown in Ward 1correspond-
ed with the number declared by the war
den. Had it shown that they CORES
pended, it would have been point in
support of the honesty and correctness
of the count. Had the contrary been
the case, it would have been conclusive
proof of either fraud or error. Mr..
Russell undoubtedly had the power to
permit an inspection Of this list. His
refusal admits of but one construction.
Probably he was acting under orders
from the bosses.
An appeal to the courts will probably
be taken to compel the issue of certifi-
Gates to Messrs. Kent and Lefavor, whose
election as councilmen is conclusively
shown by the return of the clerk of
Ward 8.
ScI,ooI Committee From Ward Seven