The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1895-07-16
This closed the testimony for the de

Tense.
Mr.. Waterman's argument opened with
the statement that the bylaws required
that legal membership should only result
from the payment of $40 and the sign
ing of the constitution. There is no other
method by which man may legally
vote. The bylaws do provide that they
may be changed by vote of the mem
bers, if notion is served of such proposed
change at the previous meeting. But
this was not done. Despite that fact the
vote of people present who had not
signed the constitution, were counted
and Charles H. Leighton was declared
elected secretary.
| At this point John E. Traitor arrived
from Westbrook. He testified that he
was present at the last meeting and as
tonished everybody and convulsed with
laughter everybody but Mr.. Whitney
and Mr. Waterman, by declaring that he
voted for BENZ. F. Whitney for secretary.
This of course defeated the object of his
testimony because 1T was only of value
| if he had voted for Charles H. Leighton
Had he not come his testimony would
have been admitted as voting for Leigh
| ton.
| Mr.. Waterman. continued and enumerat-
ed the names of those who had not signed
the constitution and declared that there
| fore they were not legal voters. Those six
voters who were thus illegal voters, as
claim ed, and who voted for Mr. Leigh
ton, cannot be included in the vote by
which he was declared elected.
In regard to the vote to ratify the do
ings of the trustees, Mr.. Waterman declared
the ratification applied simply to the
act of admitting members on the pay
ment of $40. He claimed that the bylaws
did not give the society the right to rati-
fly an action, which is illegal, according
to the requirements of the bylaws them
selves. He closed with the statement Of
the defendants claim.that there was no
legal election and that therefore his
client, Mr.. Whitney is still the lawful
secretary.
JUDGE STROUT'S DECISION.
Judge Strout said that he found by the
testimony that there were eleven Illegal
voters, according to the claims of Mr..
Waterman. OF these, six were not for
Mr.. Leighton. Subtracting the eleven
from the total Of sixty five votes, leaves
total of fifty-four. In that case twenty
eight would be necessary for choice.
Subtracting the six votes from the thirty
five cast for Leighton and he still has left
twenty nine votes, which is one. more than
the majority. If the six illegal votes for
Mr.. Leighton are thrown out all the So
called illegal votes must be thrown out.
It isn't necessary simply to show illegal
voting. That voting must have affected
the result
The judge declared that he thought the
weight of testimony was to the effect
that President Vinton was a member.
He either signed that constitution himself
or Mr.. Frye signed it for him.
Mr.. Franks argument was of course
not necessary. He stated to the judge
that he should have made the same
point that leighton had majority of
the votes and was elected, whether the
i eleven so-called Illegal votes were counted
| or not.
Mr. Frank also stated that the costs of
the case were subject to the order of the
court The society had done all that was
possible to avoid these proceedings.
Judge Strout asked Mr.. Waterman why
costs should not be awarded.
Mr.. Waterman said that he had put in
his defense and that was all he had to
say. Judge Strout referred to the fact
that the defendants might have figured
this matter out before the trial of the
case. Therefore he felt justified in award
ing the costs.
1t will be seen that the trouble with
the defendants position was that wher
they subtracted the so-called six illega
votes from Mr.. Leighton's majority they
only subtracted those six votes from the
total vote, whereas there were in al
eleven. so-called illegal votes whichyshoul6
have been subtracted from the total.
STATE TOPICS OF INTEREST.