The Portland daily press., 1898-03-09
DEERlNG ANNEXATION.
On the Face of the Returns Deering IL An
nexed-A Curious Blunder on the Part of
the Ward officers of Warda.

On the Deering ballot no cana before
yes on the annexation question, thus re-
versing the natural order. This arrange
ment, which is generally supposed to have
been made with the idea that it would
help the opponents of annexation, has
given rise to curious blunder. Ward 2,
the farmers ward. voted 1877 against to
As in favor. but the warden and clerk IN
making up their certificates credited the
1877 votes to the yes column and the 45 to
the no, thus changing majority IN the
city against annexation to one in favor.
City Solicitor Matthews made this state
ment of the case to PRESS reporter
yesterday:
The law says that the voters shall vote
yes or no. City Clerk Jones put 1t on the
ballot no or yes. Up in ward two, which
is the farmers ward the vote was evident
of election which the Constitution re-
quires to be made in open ward meeting,
signed by the warden and clerk and sealed
before adjournment, to be opened only by
the municipal officers in city council as
sembled, was found TO read 1877 yes and 40
no. This, on the face of the returns,
gives majority for annexation instead
of against it.
The only way in which this can legally
be corrected is by having recourse to the
courts since the city council is by law
obliged to canvass their returns as they
find them. 1t is further true that none
of the wards, excepting ward seven, made
returns which were proper and correct
under the provisions of the secret ballot
law, since none returned the number of
defective ballots and the number can
eelled balloss. 1t is generally understood,
however, that there were between sixty
carded as defective. If the council pro-
ceeds lawfully the above complication
will have the effect to review in court the
defective ballots of ward two and possibly
other wards, and it Is barely possible,
though not pro bable, that the result of
the election will be changed. There is no
disposition on the part of the annexation
lists to take advantage of the clerical
errors5of the warden and clerk, but mere
ly to avail themselves of any opportunity
which may come ont of it to find out just
what their strength is as shown by the
ballots marked detective.
AS Mr.. Matthews has been a prominent
annexationist he felt that his advice in
the legal aspect of the case might net be
looked upon as entirely disinterested. and
SO he Obtained from the Hon. Josiah H..
Drummond an opinion on the matter
which is as follows:
Portland, Me-. March s, 1898.
Fred V. Matthews, ESQ.,:
My Dear Sir:-In reference to elections
in cities, the Constitution, Art. Nv,
Part /, Section 5, provides:
1.-THE electors resident in any city may,
at any meeting duly notified for the
choice of representatives, vote for such
representatives in their respective ward
meetings, and the wardens In said wards
shall preside impartially at such meet
ings, receive the votes OF all quatine0
electors present, sort, count and declare
them in open ward meetings, and in the
presence of the ward clerk, who shall
form list of the persons voted for, with
the number of votes for each person
against his name, shall make fair record
thereof in the presence of the warden, and
in open ward meetings; and fair copy
of this list shall be attested by the warden
and ward clerk, sealed up in open ward
meetings, and delivered to the city clerk
within twenty -four hours after the close
of the polls. And the electors resident in
any city may at any meetings duly mott
fed and holden for the choice of any other
civil officers for whom they have been
required heretofore to vote in town meet.
ing, vote for such officers in their respec-
shall be had by the warden and ward
clerk in each ward, as in the case of votes
for representatives. And the aldermen OF
any city shall be in session within
twenty-four hours after the close of the
polls in such meetings. and in the
presence of the city clerk shall open, ex'
anime and compare the copies from the
lists of votes given in the several wards,
of which the city clerk shall make a
record, and return thereof shall be made
into the secretary of states office in the
same manner as selectmen of towns are
required to do.
The duty thus specifically described
must be done in open ward meeting, and
after that meeting has adjourned, the re-
turn cannot be changed in any manner
by the ward officers, and no new returns
can be made.
The package sealed up in open ward
meeting cannot lawfully be opened by any
officer other than the board of aldermen
Their only power and duty is to ascer-
tain and declare the resu + as shown by
these returns.
Errors in the returns cannot be cor
rected by the ward officers, or the board
court or such other body as is made the
Judge of the election of its members.
There was formerly provision that the
Governor and Council might send foI
corrected returns and receive testimony
in relation.to them SO far as relates to the
offices upon which they were called to
pass but this power was not given to any
other board (statutes of 1887, chapter 2ls).
This statute was amended in 1880, limit
ing the proceedings to receiving testimony
on oath to show that the return did not
agree with the record and which of the
two was correct. This statute is incorpo-
rated in chapter rs, section S, of the Re
yised Statutes and the power is given by
it to the Governor and Council alone.
Yours very truly.
JOSIAH II. DRUMMOND.
I concur in the above,
CHARLES E. LIBBY,
SETH L. LARRABEE.