Jamestown weekly alert. [volume] (Jamestown, Stutsman County, D.T. [N.D.]) 1882-1925, 1896-12-03
ANSWER OF {, N. SANFORD
To Complaint of B. w. Fuller
Who is Contesting the
Senat0rship.
Sanford Denies That llle-
gal Votes We're Counted
or Cast For Him.

gal votes were Counted
or Cast For Him.
But Asserts That Such Was
Done in Interests of
Contestant.
Before the State Senate, State Of
North Dakota.
Bailey w. Fuller, contestant, versus E.
NJ. Sanford, oontestee. .,.
ANSWER OF CONTESTEE.
Contestee now and at all times here
after, protesting and saving to himself
all manner OF benefit or advantage of
exception or otherwise that can or may
be had or taken t. the many errors, ,uncer-
tainties and imporfections in the said
notice of contest contained; for his
answer thereunto, alleges:
Firet-As to paragraph No. one, OF
said complaint or notice Of contest; he
admits that Stutsman county comprises
the 23rd, senatorial district Of North
Dakota
And that on the 18th, day Of Novem-
her A. d. 1896 the board Of canVassers
for said coanty. appointed by virtue OF
the law, to canvass the vote ct said
county as alleged, made out the returns
Of said election in said county, and by
such abstract of returns it was shown,
that for tho candidates for state senator
IN said district, there were 1879 votes
cast; and that contestee, Sanford, re-
ce;ved 646 and contestant, Fuller re-
ceived 633 votes, and that the county
auditor ,ssued and delivered to said con.
testee T.. NJ. Sanford, certificate OF
election as state senator in and for said
23rd, district, az by lew he was bound to
do.
But this contestee denies that said
oaEvassing board unlawfuily included
CT counted for him any votes from the
precincts Of Plngree and Montpelier.
He says there we're only one set Of re-
turns from Pingrees and Montpelier*pre-
cincts that came to the Office OF the au.
diter Of SAID county, and that such re-
turns were sent to said auditor by the
inspectors and judges of the precinct
aforesaid, gproperly sealed and directed,
and that the same we're by said auditor
turreu over TO the said board OF canvas
sers AS the returns OF said precincts.
That the inspectors, Judges and clerks
said took the oath Of office as by law
provaded-kept a register OF the votes,
together with tslls-sheet OF each vote,
and for whom such votes we're cast-as
shown by their said returns, but neg
lected to attach their signatures to the
last page of their said election returns
from such precincts.
Contestee states that the judges of
election of said Plngree precinct appear
cd before the said canvassing board in
person, be foresaid returns were counted,
and while the said board were in session,
on the morning OF th 18th, Of November
A. D. 1886, and presented the.r affidavit
of which the following Is a t.ne copy
to wit:
STATE OF NoRrHDAKorA, So
County of Stutsma1.
E. E. Strong, inspector; G. Nj. Lovett,
and H. E. Boyd, judges of election OF
The PlnRree precinct in said county, each
for himself says on his oath, that they
made out returns Of said precinct elec-
tiou in dnpllcate; that they signed the
certificate and completed one copy of
said returns. That by mistake the
clerk inclosed the copy so compted in
the ballot box. and sealed up the same,
and sent to the county auditor the other
copy without their certificate attached.
That the copy in the hands OF said au-
ditor or said board of canvassers is a
correct return Of election of SAID Pingree
precinct, except the said signatures to
the certificate as aforesaid. That they
now appear in person before said can
yassipg board and ask the privilege to
sign said returns as by law they we're
required to do.
E. E. STRONG.
H. E. BOYD.
G. NJ LovErT.
Subscribed and sworn to before me
on this 18th, day Of November. 1896.
E. M. SANFORD.
(SeaD Notary Public.
And that they there and then asked
cave to sign any blanks remaining un-
signed on their said returns, then before
,aid board. That thereupon the said
BOARD lawfully and correctly entered
lpon their said abstract OF votes cast IN
,aid county, the returns of Pingree and |
precincts aforesaid, and law
ully and correctly counted the same.
That by said abstract go lawfully and
made out by said canvassing
BOARD, contestee received GAG votes and
contestant 633 votes for the office of
state senator.
Second-As to paragraph two Of said
or notice OF contest, conteetee
denies on information and belief that