The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1896-08-07
ORR WlSRE-ELECTED
Superior Court at Tacoma De
clares Against Fawcett.
THIS GUSTS THE FueIoNIsTs.
DaIiSts VIA Dsse1ngufshfng Nssks
ThrowsOu ard ths ssssen DslsSss
Counted - Rseor4sa.
THIS GUSTS THE Fus,onisTs.

~ 4e&yor E1var1 G. Orr sxsanss Aessss
Mayer Ansae yanes Fawnesk Tns eSuTi
hss1s thss Mayor Orr ~as rs-sssssss .
rs Office ~ . na3cr1sy Of y vossx- sns
tasrsfors directed sas s:so~rsTs for faH
mayer - prepare q xesyss Awarding ia
yertise - him.
The Eeriazen was Eaei ssoFf5v D~sore ,
sfcsszk sfss sfssrnosn. II wss eeon Known
o. the strsess that Nxyer Orr nae been
Declared rs-eaeesn6 % recsuTsL szsd fEsre
~Ms xrs1z resosc1sx sneGnG aas 9Tas1zs.
Who az1 ssbowed bard snc coFse}ss Sous
~ for asx rs-slsction IL sas campaign sast
sgftnr Mayer Orr wss fo0nd ana eofs-
Gratasafsd ~ few frasoos. snea'.sAnx -
arso~reys A sabssfsen meeting u talks.
% ans<snx "a. Mayors frisnds and pron-
tsens Tssasssezns wsse ss5exse 80 his L.
xsr~st lis the s5sefIon
Actlnx Mayor Faweefs recsfyet TIRE
news sfotcztIy Tfe 6f nee care 10 dis
esass tire ssssfs~ a. length. ssytnx fns
case was IN the h2n1s q nas attorneys.
II IL understood tass Mayor Fswcett's
frssr6s. anticipating thai serbaSx the S~y-
6fet 81 she court. on ths showing male
Hgrsng the srlx.. would be &xalnst asrn.
have arranged 70 present his name for
xossrnov 70 he seiot convention of DEM
oefats sssa Fcpalssta 81 EAlsnsDs1fg Bar
~eex.
Judge pr.teha~sss srsnIcr IN ire case 10
tong slabarzte ard carefully written, and
81 The oglnton 81 lawyers - . yery ans
ard scholarly document. Fer the reason
that tbs ~ the first eAe~ 81 1ts Kind n t9e
hsssery q the state. Judge PFfeAar1 fed
. typawrfttsn oasnioa. copy % which
was seeur~s sy me poss-lnsAsssenesf.
JUICE Prssehsra finds fhst On the count
Of sndisgufed ballots Orr received - and
TaScsts $50 votes giving Mayor Orr =
lead Of %. One hundred and slghty-fiy@
bsslofs we're ebiertea 20. ard on the
courts decision as 70 them hinged the
case. The vot1 a. resarraeH By The esae-
ton boards w4s Faweett zes3 Orr 2.Esf.
The disputed hailess. after throwing oas
tAre~s Hhieh were - gSnintes'sgsose a. %
render them va.ges<sa 20 the court.
amounted 20 La OF these 10 Nsra re-
teets1 BY the cosrt on various grounds
bat ehisgy because tfssy contained Dis
sif.xaishing marks or we're marked BY tha
voter 20 the isft OF the candidates names
instead Of after them or 20 the right.
9nss eft twsnsy-fkree votes 80 be count
I'd. ana the court decided that four %
these should GO 20 Orr and nlneteen %
Tawoetf. This l~fs the vote az decided BY
she court. Orr z.ss4. Fawoett 2sqe.
Judge BrifchArd In his opinfon said:
THE ballots from four precincts in thu
city are shown ~ the evidences 70 have
been destroyed or removed ard los; by the
unlawful and criminal &C. OF some one yet
undiscossysf. and because Of this boYrid
ard asspsrabie crime the case has perhaps
attracted more than ordinary attention.
In view Of the public Interest u has seem
ID beat 70 the court 20 reduce the opsnioa
IN the case 10 writing. SO that Il may be
clearly understood
Judging from the condition OF the bal
lots which have been offered In evidence.
and the comparison Of their count. made
In opsn court. With the returns OF the
election officers from the same precinets.
81 could not be inferred that tbs lost bal
lots woaIi. n present and in evidence. ma
fsrsaily change the result which has been
arrived At By the court: and think Il IL
proper To eay. IN passing. word
81 comner<3ation In favor Of these
election of1csrs, and 20 call at
tention 20 the remarkable accuracy OF their
work. believe there was no error found
IN the calculation or count made by these
officers ard any discrepancy that may sp-
pear 10 exist between their determination
ard that % the court must be explained
upon the ground and for fss soIs reason
that the ooart has had greater opport9ni-
ties Tor dellheratton. and has had the aid
OF counsel learned In lag 10 scrutinise sy-
cry particular ballot, and shed upon II the
light that has been derived from weeks
and months OF devoted study OF the legal
aspects Of the case"
Relative 70 the iss votes tha, were re-
5eeted the court said
upon each o. them tbs voter appears
90 have made marks which have no rela-
ton 70 ard can have no innocent e0nneo-
ton ssth the making az the mark or cross
which r. authorized By the statute Here
shsr~ IL sanaashinw more thar mere want
Of form. and while e y true hat she
voter 10 each case may possibly have Raj
40 uriasfal Intention. the question il
whether his innoeencs can se presumed
position % tsas&a ballots VIII be d9css8es
OF ire controversy between the rsiator
ana Tic Fe&pon8eat. and X - very graft
sglng ilAl such teessIaa may Re re4chsd
without resort1nx % any mere 5asaelal
discretion or exercise % judgment. 20
saY nothing ef mere xa~ssas. wa.ch must
sometimes - reaortaa 20 30 eefermlne re
Intention % voter by an Inspection Of
hts tal.ot.
'sThe question here presented il puresy
q question % iaw ant the issue Is u asieh
srAnscen5eat eut far~reacalng Importance
THAT Ia SIS preeszls. tie query as % who
ahs.i pres Sc over the affairs Of the city
Of Tacousa "a It's usayoF fer che nsxt year
ard half paies info u0thtnx.
ssIiy the laws Of the sfate Of Washing ten.
as amended ia is9S. d must - apparent.
rot only 20 the lawyer but 70 the mozt
casual reader. thar r was tntsra@a "
the legislature 20 devise and prepare
scheme OF elections sn this state whereby
the voters should es protected IN ne
greatest freedom IN this exercise OF TIRE
highest ~ all civic tuttss. ara Whereby
re essosid not only be relieved from, az
forms OF Intimidation and un8ae influence
On The part Of others. bat should also be
delivered from All temptation te barter h's
vote Tor money 81 other profit or heaegt
of any kind 20 himself II Is not neess-
sarY. ara weala not be profitable TO here
onote the statutes at large or cali attea-
sfoa 20 the numerous safeguards thsrssn
contained which sre evidently calculated
and designed 20 effect this srd. oar stat
ute - 80 siagilsr in It's main provisions
- the recent enActwsrts % many other
states 20 the Union that much aid can -
obtained IN SIS construction nv resertirg
20 the decisions 90 ccart- ~ last resort IN
ether states. As oftsn happens. however
the statutes ~ ths ether states sr- not
uetferustr ike ear own. In az % them
where ssr1siAr iegtsiatfar has been a..
tempted ~iH be fapna prov isions .uhstau-
TALLY Nse csfrs. PROHIBITING any efstln-
Fsssshsnk marks upon ballots. In rrAay o.
thsyr tsere - also az express prov ; en-
Fsresicitfas the counting 90 aav Saffat
attaining anv such distinguishing ~as~k
IN others sre - - faana rsnAl ps-uvf-
ftenr. tnrfetsns & punishment upca any
voter. eF ether 1sFsan, wso places Ttsea a
HlHf aTatsslrg mark sron hslpt Beth
- these latter provisions are shssns frors
our statute.
The re@gsoss>ss erxs1es ara ea--a a.
esnteossen usasns~ rrse.r 80 AAsepya -
s,.sze xrox .-sss.s trOrs ear seatstes. tass 4
THE GAS COMPANY. |
sagrass al has. .; rsA,