Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1895-01-08

The decision Of the law court 10 the
famous county buildings case was pro-
mulyated last week. As intimated by
the Democrat two weeks ago, the bill In
equity Is dismissed, aud the legality OF
the vote for removal Is sustained. Be
low we give the full text of the decision,
As rendered by Chief Justice Peters;
TIE PULL TINT OF THE DECISION.
In instituting proceedings to obtain
the consent OF the county of Oxford for
the erection OF new county buildings In
that county, the county commissioners
of the county issued 10 the municipal
authorities OF all the towns and planta-
tions In the county the following notice:
You arr hereby notified that Il " our intention
/ 10 erect new county buildings, including court
rooms Offices for tho scycral county officers, jury
/ rooms, library rooms, and hrc proof vaults Tor
/ the records Of the probate Office, register 81
,lccis clerk OF courts and county treasurer. Abe
/ jaii and jailcr's house At n cost not Ia exceed
1 sSa0so on the following described lot. situated
! In the village % south Paris near The railroad
]
than half n mile from the present location OF the
| county buildings. 10 Wit Beginning on The
| westerly siie OF Western Avenue az point che
hundred sRd ten feet ~outhcriy from the hoTtheT
1 Is corner OF land belonging o. The heir of Ira
| Cieashy. thence north eighty degrees west. four
hun,lrcs, and twenty nine feet, thence north four
degrees cast, two hundred AMI forty feet, thence
/ south eighty degrees ca-t four hundred anu
twenty nine feet TO said Western Avenue, thence
| southsr,y by said Western Avenue. two hundred
and forty fee, 10 the point begun at
| And yoa arc further notified that the consent
Of the county l. a-kc,i tina, the county oommis-
.ioners have authority 20 ohtain loan Of money
for the use OF the county 10 the amount OF 80
GO and is-ue therefor notes or obligations OF the
county, with coupons for lawful Interest, " INA!
amount AMI you are hereby directed to insert
the following article In the warrant for the town
meeting At the next annual election. to be hoiicn
March next -
/ To see II the county commissioners shall lie
authorized 10 erect new county buildings. In
cluding court fooms, Offices for the several roun
- ofhcsr-, jury rooms, library foOme, AMI ufc
proof vaults for the records of the probate Office
register of deeds. clerk Of courts and county
treasurer also jail and jailcr'- house on the loi
selected by them nj south Paris, and described
a. follows. WIN. Bssinning on the westerly side
of Western Avenue, at point one hundred and
ten feet -outhcrly from the northcrly corner oi
land belonging 20 the heir 81 Ira Clca-by
thence north eighty degrees west. four hundred
aud twenty nine feet; thence north four
degrees east, two hundred AMI forty feet. thence
south eighty degrees east, four hundred and
twenty nine feel 90 said Western Avenue
thence southerly by said Western Avenue. tive
hundred and forty feet 30 the point begun at, q,
a oo-t no, TO exceed thirty thousand dollars. and
a. obtain loan for the use of the comfy for
SAIL sun of thirty thousand dollar. or such a
part thereof a. they may pecd, and Issue thcre
FOR The notes or obligations OF the county, with
coupons for lawful interest.
All In favor to give In their votes with the
word yes" printed or written thereon. and al
opposed with the word mo" printed OF written
thereon.
In or,icr a. secure uniformity Of action In the
several towns. We have prepared printed copies
OF the above article for use by the several towns
and We recommend that I, be Inserted In the town
warrant next after the article providing Tor
choice OF moderator ami that the votes bc de
posted In a separate ballot box. and that the
poli- lie KEEP; open during the entire session oil
the town meeting held ON that day. SAID votes
to lie received. sorted and counted. for AMI
against said proposal. by the municipal officers,
and they. the said municipal officers, and The
clerks OF the several towns and plaathttons N
said oxford County. shall certify ann return
commis-ioner- that the same may lie examiner
and action taken according 10 the statute In such
case male and provided.
And We further recommend that the check
list lie properly and seasonably posted and used
In the several towns and plantations, In voting
ami that the newly elected municipal officers he
no; sworn until amer the closing OF the polls on
the foregoing proposal, 80 that the same onlcer-
may act throughout
Given under our hands and the seal OF sal!
court, this fourteenth day OF February. a. ID.
lss9-
WN woopsuN. County Commissioners
j. h. SIEARNs, County OF oxford.
IL appears that the record Of the coun-
" commissioners court is in due form,
properly authorizing submission of
the question TO the legal voters OF the
county; and that the proposition was
carried by small minority Of the per-
sons voting. The closeness OF the vote,
and the feeling manifest against the re-
suit in some localities In the county led
To the institution of this bill in equity, TO
see IL, upon close investigation and
scrutiny, il might be discovered that the
result should be voided for fraudulent
voting or for some illegality in the pro-
ceedings.
Ga the allegation Of fraud the CON-
plainants fail. Enough fraudulent or
illegal votes are not proved to change
the result, although the evidence on that
point may be enough to reduce some
what the majority by which the record
declares the vote 10 have been carried.
We have examined the facts produced
on that part Of the case, but judicial
opinion is not a place In which TO insert
many details and calculations of figures.
Objections are taken 10 the form of the
proposition submitted by the commits
sioners to the people. II Is contended
that two propositions should not have
been submitted TO be passed upon by
one vote; and further contended that
whether the county would consent to
new buildings was one proposition, and
whether such new buildings should cost
not exceeding thirty thousand dollars
was another. The argument Ia that
there should have been as many distinct
and independent votings MS there were
subjects or things to vote up
on: that the two propositions would
carry more votes than either one would
carry alone. and that 10 that way re-
suit might follow which would be un-
fair.
la the first place, we think 1t to be
plain that the premises assumed by tie
compliments are not true. There were
not two propositions submitted. But
one proposition Is contained In the
phrase ITO build new county buildings
st cost not exceeding thirty thousand
dollars" The most that can be claimed
In that respect il that there are two
parts In the proposition, such two parts
being but one whole. Every whole has
its parts. The cost Of the buildings is
only descriptive Of the buildings them
selves, OF their kind and degree. II a
man sends his agent to buy 3 horse for
him at price not exceeding five hundred
dollars, Is that one proposition or two
propositions? Does the agent do one er-
rand or two errands? 1t would be an
awkward situation II the agent reported
that he had agreed with seller Of horses
as to a price, but not as to the horse, or
vice versa. Or, IL the agent Is entrusted
with authority to buy house for his
principal, to be situated on Oxford Street |
and to be purchased for price not ex- |
ceeding thirty thousand dollars, Is the
agent thereby empowered to do more
than one thing? Are not the price and
locality parts Of the proposition Of pur-
chase? Are they not merely descriptive |
Of the house, In q general way defining |
the kind OF house?
A proposition does not become two
fold by annexing to IL some condition or
qualification. The condition Is not Of
itself proposition, but only part Of
one. Il seems TO Us 10 the present case