The Grit-advocate., 1904-12-30
Denver.

no uNCef lAluty 40 " thC iSoui' VI
the fraud investigation as 1t affects
the governorship. has been largely re-
moved since my last letter. The In
vestigation conducted by the Republl-
cans and the Supreme Court has pro-
duced evidence which clearly demon
strates that the fraudulent Democratic
vote in Denver far exceeds the total
plurality counted for Mr.. Adams on the
face OF the returns.
This evidence will be presented to
the Legislature ON January 4th and an
immediate hearing will be asked which
will undoubtedly be granted.
As already stated. the fraud in the
100 lower precincts is so extensive and
consists of SO many varieties, as to
make it impossible to separate the
good from the bad ballots. The fraud
ulent vote in the other precincts is not
quite so extensive or complicated and
It is possible that in these the good and
the bad ballots might be separated.
A Recognized Principle.
The outcry against the Supreme
Court from leading Democratic attor-
neys on the ground that it has estab-
lished dangerous precedent mas
failed to make any impression upon
those who are in any way familiar with
the matter. Technically the court did
form a precedent, but really it violated
no principle Of law or justice. On the
contrary it followed the practice that
has been in vogue in our courts and
legislative bodies for century. Where
the fraud is so extensive or OF such
nature as to render it impossible to de-
termine the actual legal vote cast IN
precinct, the whole return is tainted.
When the election officials are parties
to the fraud the return Is further
tainted and its integrity destroyed and
under such conditions it has been de-
cided always that the whole return
from such ballot box should be thrown
out. This is all the Supreme Court
did.
There Is no law against forming a
precedent in this country, particularly
when the precedent is formed to pur-
ify our civic life.
Mr.. Patterson and the other Demo
cratic attorneys appear to be thor
ouEhly welded to the belief that es-
tAblished precedents should not be dis
: turbed, that violation OF them tech
nically or in principle is the invasion
of constitutional rights and danger to
the perpetuity Of Republican institu-
tions.
A Democratic Precedent.
The Democratic election thieves of
the lower wards Of Denver long since
established the precedent of stuf1ng
the ballot boxes in that section of the
city. and stealing the elections for the
Democratic ticket. The average
Democrat Is glad to see these election
crooks punished and their outrageous
crimes on the ballot suppressed, but
the big Democratic lawyers, faithful to
their love of holding established pre-
cedent" lnviolate. are objecting seri-
ously to this smashing of the Big
Mitt's most precious precedent. Mr..
Patterson goes SO far as to say that
In smashing it a deadly blow has
been struck against republican institu-
lions"
These attorneys are equally active
and insistent upon maintaining their
contention that the state canvaSsing
board has no right to go behind the re-
turns; that it must accept them as sent
in BY the county officials and issue
election certificates accordingly. They
will make exactly the same contention
about the power of the Legislature
when that body undertakes to investl-
gate the Democratic frauds in Denver
and other counties which have ''on the
face of the returns" shown Mr. Adams
to be elected.
Who Decides the Question?
1t is conceded that some high au-
thority of the state government must
receive the returns and determine who
is elected. This privilege at present
seems to be claimed by Senator Pat
terson for himself and his brother lead
ers Of the Democratic party. But the
law says that the state Canvassing
board shall canvass the vote for ma.
tional candidates. legislative candi
dates, and. In fact, all candidates ex-
cept the state officers. When the re-
turns are in and it is determined who
is elected this board issues election
certificates accordingly.
When the Legislature meets it re-
ceives the returns for state officers
from governor down, canvasses them
and issues certificates to those whom
in its judgment are elected.
Two years ago they maintained that
the canvassing board could go behind
the returns and Judge Adair Wilson OF
the Appeals Court. Democrat him
self, so decided. Now it appears to be
wrong. But aside from the opinions of
political lawyers and judges 1t would
seem plain that these canvassing au-
thoriues have the right to reject what
they are convinced are fraudulent re.
turns. The people of Colorado would
hardly be 30 foolish as to create can
vassing authority and make it its duty
to accept returns as sent in from local
county officials whether right or
wrong.
For example. let us suppose that the