The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1898-04-21


for the property of the office. He remem.
bered the conversation with that gentle
man however. very much as Mr.. Parker
had narrated it,
This closed the evidence.
At the opening of the case IN the after
noon Carroll W. Morrill, argued briefly for
the defendant He argued that although
the town meeting might elect superln-
tendent of schools it had not voted to do
so and therefore could not legally SO elect
that officer. The two parties heio d eau
Gus, but no such office as superintenaeho
of schools was named and no nonlha-
| tions were made. The Office did not ap-
| pear on the official ballot ana thereiore,
as no vote to elect this officer by pailoo
| was taken, the town meeting could not
elect him.
M. p. Frank made the argument lof
| the plaintiff. He claimed that the Town
meeting was not to be bound by the act-
Ion OF certain individuals and II the
meeting wanted to elect the superinten-
dent OF schools it had a right to go ahead
and do SO. Leroy B. Mason made mo-
tion to proceed to the election Of necessary
| town officers and this motion was car
ried. The superintendent of schools was
among these officers and who shall say
that the members of that town meeting
did not have right to vote for such an
officer if they so desiredp
| Judge Haskell in rendering his decis-
ion, said in substance.
"The plaintiff in this case, Cyrus L.
Parker. claims to have been elected super
intendent of schools in the town of Wind
ham in the year 1898. He alleges that he
has been duly sworn and attempted to
enter upon the discharge of his duties,
but was prevented from SO doing by Hi
ram G. Hawkes. who assumes the legal
rights of the Office by law. The burden
of proof is on the plaintiff to show that
he was legally elected to this office. If
he fails to show that he was legally
elected he fails in his case In order to
establish his slection the plaintiff
claims that of the 47S ballots thrown at
the town meeting 81 were thrown for him
as superintendent of schools. When the
vote OF the town meeting was counted OBJ
lection was made to the plaintiffs being
declared elected and the clerk in his rec
ord says that such objection was made
and therefore did not declare the plain
tiff elected. The proceedings of this an
nual town meeting were illegal and
irregular. The proceedings of town meet
ings from time immemorial have been
simple and plain. The statute provides
that the town meeting shall first elect a
moderator during the election the clerk
shall preside. The moderator shall then
be duly sworn and then the town meet
ing may proceed to other business.
''This town meeting in Windham
elected no moderator. A motion, the
first one according to the record which
was made, was that the town proceed to
vote for the election of all necessary
town officers. This vote was carried. It
was irregular, but that was the way the
thing was done. Ballots had been pre-
pared with the names of the town officers
inserted aon them. The office of superin-
tendent of schools was not on the ballot.
but the office of superintendent of schools
was not mentioned on this specimen bal
B "Now assuming that the motion
was carried to proceed to the election of
all necessary town officers, what are its
terms? What is the meaning of the word
necessary? The law says (Act of 1897,
that these officers ars clerk, selectmen,
oyerseers Of the poor, assessors, fenc,
viewers, tything men, collector OF taxes.
constables, ETC., and it further adds that
the road commissioner and auditor Of
accounts shall be chosen. These are the
officers the town must choose. The stl-
perintendent of schools is not among
them. That officer may be elected by
the experimenting school committee or
the statute says he may be elected by
the town meeting. But if this is done
there should be a vote taken before hand
that this is to be done. In this case no
vote of the kind was taken. I take the
position then, said. Judge Haskell, that
Mr.. Parker was not legally elected.
Whether the other officers elected by that
town meeting were legally elected or not
have nothing to do with. MY duty is
to decide this case alone. I therefore
deny the petition of the plaintiff without
costs.