The Lafayette gazette. [volume] (Lafayette, La.) 1893-1921, 1897-05-29
THE ANSWER
Filled Denies That Any Fraud Was
Committed bv the Democrats,

Judge S. D. Read, of Calcasieu,
to whom the contested election case
was transferred by Judge Debaillon,
who Reused himself, presided over
the District Court Thursday. The
case was fixed for trial for June 20.
The defendants filed bill of excep-
ton to the jurisdiction of the court
on the ground of the unconstitution-
atty of the acts of the Legislature
under which the contest was
brought. Messrs. Winston Over
ton, Chas. D. (:affery and Orther
c. Mouton, the defendants coun
sci, filed the following answer to
the petition of the contestants:
CHOW into court come defendants
in above entitled and numbered
cause, who, reserving their rights
under the exceptions of want of
jurisdiction ratione materiae, for
answer to plaintiffs petition, deny
all and singular the allegations
thereof, except in SO far as they
may be hereinafter admitted, and
for further answer allege:
ssThey admit that Chas. D. CAT
ferry was a candidate for mayor and
YOUR other defendants for council
men of the town of Lafayette, La,
at the municipal election held in
said town on the third day of May,
1897, for election Ivy the people;
they aver that said election was
held under the provisions of act
No. 1877 of 1896 and on the date
fixed in the charter of said town;
that said election was held accord
ing to law, the legal ballots counted
by the commissioners Of election as
shown by their returns; that said
act 1877 of 1896 applies to municipal
elections; that your respondents
have received a majority of the
legal votes cast at said election and
returned elected according to law.
ssRespondents further aver: That
the commissioners, the clerk and
watchers at said election were ap-
pointed by the supervisors of cleo
ton under the provisions of act
No. 1877 of 1896; that the munich
pal authorities of the town of La
fayette had no power or authority
to appoint commissioners of cleo
ton; that the power to APP
point commissioners of election
by the charter of said town is
repealed by said act 137 of 1896,
and the appointment of commits
sioners by the city council as
alleged by plaintiffs was made in
error of law and was ultra wires;
that your respondent c. d. CAT
fiery, presiding at said meeting of
the council did in open and public
session state that it had no such
lower and that same was now
lodged with the Supervisors of cleo
ton under act 1877 of 1896; that
when application was made to your
respondent, G. D. Caffery, as
mayor, to call a meeting of the
Council to give plaintiffs the ap
pointment of commissioner, his
answer, a copy of which will show,
informed them of these facts with
the statement that their remedy was
to apply to the supervisors of cleo
ton whose duty it was under the
law to make the appointment of the
officers and commissioners of cleo
ton:
s'Responden:s further answering
aver: That the object and purpose
of the Australian system of voting
adopted in this state by act 1877 of
1896 is to preserve the secrecy of
the ballot, prevent intimidation,
corruption and bribery; that at the
only previous election held under
this law in Nov. 1896 the purpose
of the law in these respects had not
and could not be carried out from
the manner and place the officers
had located the booth and box;
tn at the object of the authorities in
placing the box and booths in the