The Newtown bee., 1902-10-31

case in New Milford, necessarily we
determine who are elected by ascar-
tanning who of these three persons le
ceived a plurality of the ballots cast.
The three receiving the lighe st vote
are tic thee having plurality of the
votes cast and are the three duly elect
ed. Every vote cast for one Of II es,
men must he counted for him IT.
respective Of whet her it be the~name
placed over the candidate holding the
lower or second place or the higher or
first place on the ballot. If this were
not so a man would be elected to office
who did not obtain plurality over the
man declared jected, and the reject
! ed candidate would be the one who
had polled a greater number of votes
! than one Of the candidates declared
: elected.
In this case votes cast for candi-
date standing second on a ballot by
placing his name over the name of a
candidate standing first on the opposi-
tion ballot were counted, while votes
cast for a candidate standing first on
ballot by placing his name over the
name Of candidate standing second
on the opposition ballot were rejected
These votes ought to have been
treated in the same way and every vote
cast for any candidate for selectman
ought to have been counted for him.
no matter whether the vote appeared
over the name of the person first
named or second named on the ballot.
In no other way can the people have
the persons selected whom they vote
| for in greatest number.
AS Mr. Barnes has 1856 votes on ballots
where his name appears as first on the
ballots and one vote on a ballot where
his name appeared second on the bal
lot he received and was entitled to
have had counted for him for select
man 1877 votes.
AS Mr. Buck received $50 votes on
ballots where his name appeared first
on the ballots and eight votes on bal
lots where his name appeared second
on the ballots, he received and was en-
titled to have had counted for. him 1888
votes for selectman. Mr. Buck was one
of the selectmen elected, and the law
provides that ''Of the persons elected
selcctmen, the person first named on
a plurality of the ballots cast for them
or any of them shall be first select
man.
jSj
office of first selectman and it desig-
mates which of the selectmen elected
shall be first selectman. Under the
construction given this statute in
Mallett VS.. Plumb, Goth Connecticut
1852, Mr. Buck is the person first named
on plurality of the ballots cast for
selectmen and he is by force of the
statute the duly constituted first Sc
lectman. This petitioner simply prays
that the petitioner be declared elected
selectman and the judgment is render
ed in accordance with such prayer and
the certificate issued as provided by
statute to the petitioner.
G. w. Wheeler, Judge.
Decree and Certificate.
This petition praying that the under
signed authority enquire into the facts
set forth in the petition, under re-
count of the votes cast for your petit
toner and the respondent, respective
Iy, and find and decide that the petit
toner was legally elected selectman
of the town of New Milford, and that
the respondent was not elected Sc
Iectman of said town at the election
held on the first Monday of October,
1902, came before me, sitting as a Judge
as aforesaid on the Goth day of Octo-
Der. 1902, when the parties appeared
and were at issue as by said pleadings
on file. And on said day after hearing
had, | ordered the ballot box of said
town used at said election to be opened
against the objection and exception of
said respondent and on recounting the
votes as found in said box, | find the
issue in favor of the petitioner, and
find that the petitioner received 1873
votes for said Office at said election and
that the respondent received 4S7 votes
for said Office, and find, adjudge and
decree that the petitioner, j. LIE Roy
Buck, was duly elected to said office of
selectman of the town of New Milford