Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1905-09-24
CANVASS SHOWS ODD THINGS
of8cial CENT Of Votes in County Primaries
Revssls Some 1rrsgulAritisL
no CHANGES SHOWN BY THE REVIEW
Men whose Names DO Not Even
Appear in city Directory Are
voted on for Com
mitteemen.

Completion Of the canvass Of the primary
election 50 far as the county is concerned,
was effected Saturday by County Clerk
Drexel Frank Furay and Otto Bauman.
While the official canvass did not change
results it developed some interesting facts.
In the Second precinct Of the Third ward
Of Omaha there was no indication Of a
democratic ballot. No candidate on the
democratic ticket was credited with
single vote. While the canvassers won
dered, they set the figures down as they
| came and according to the official record
| OF the primary election no democrats in the
Second precinct Of the Third ward was
bold enough to register himself under his
| party name.
peculiar condition developed in the
Second precinct OF the Fourth ward,
| where S. S. Sugarman received two votes
for republican committeeman. There is no
such person as s. S. sugarman named in
the Omaha directory. There is S. Sugar
man, a tailor. and NJ. l. sugarman. clerk
1 in the county judges Office. J. X. Boyle,
who filed a nomination paper for commit
| teeman. afterwArd withdrew his name in
order to serve on the election board, which
! he did
The vote for the Second precinct Of the
Fifth ward in South Omaha was rejected
in total by the canvassing board. There
were no signatures of the election officers
TO the returns Neither was there any in
dication Of party afhliation, and the un-
| official clerks return, as 1t Is known, did
not TALL with the total registration at all.
Instead of charging up IS for their work,
individually, the election officers marked
up 81. and one Of them added 50 cents for
mileage, which the law does not recognize.
No List of Voters nj All.
In the Second precinct Of the Fourth
ward, South Omaha, there was no list of
voters at all Beyond this, the tally OF the
alleged result is in lead pencil, which is
! forbidden by the law. The canvassers
passed the matter up. however, and so far
as this precinct is concerned it stands.
George H. Cockrell one Of the candidates
/ for Justice of the peace, reported defeated,
is nominated by a comfortable plurality.
In the Third precinct Of the Third ward
he is credited in the total with forty votes
In the count he is not given one vote, his
name not appearing at all in the tally.
In the Fifth precinct OF the Fourth ward
| OF Omaha, forty-siN votes are counted for
one democratic candidate for police Judge.
The record, II It is worth anything, shows
that less than forty people voted the demo-
| cratic ticket in this precinct. How this
.
! TO be explained.
! Fritz Bloomer and his opponent for COM
/ mitteeman. Mr.. Leis, in the Fifth pre-
! cinct OF the Second ward, do not appear
4 at all on the tally sheet of the poll book.
On the unofficial return Of the clerks each
man is credited with thirty-three votes. The
law provides that where a tie OCCURS such
| as this is shown 10 be on its face, the
board for canvassers shall decide it by lot.
Owing to the apparent irregularity Of the
return the canvassing board decided that
! it could take no action whatever in this
precinct and passed it up.
Queer Little circumstance.
In the First precinct of the Sixth ward
of Omaha. Mcdonald and Leslie ran about
! in the proportion of three TO one, com
pared to any other candidates without any
apparent reason that any person can give.
No other republican candidates got any
thing like the vote Of the two mentioned,
even in instances where there was no con-
taRt.
In one district, Thomas Anderson. for
committeeman, is credited with thirty -elght
votes. Yet he never filed for the position
the canvassers say and the officers of the
election board did not apparently know that
he had to comply with this Formally; and
the returns seem 10 show they did not
care.
Mcdonald received. according to the re-
turns, 1853 votes in the Fourth precinct of
the Twelfth ward. while Fred Hoye is
credited with only sixty-six. Altogether
out of proportion with that of the other
candidates.
The same thing may be said of Florence
precinct where Mcdonald IL credited with
124. against forty-two for Hoye. It should
] -. ID 10
received l99 votes in Florence. the high
est vote ever cast by long odds. this year
over 30 people appear TO have been regis
tered.
East Omaha and Valley precincts are
recorded equally heavy for Mcdonald, but
: all the other candidates went with just
remembrance, II the returns are correct
wonder IL They DidnIs
In one precinct of South Omaha, Tom
/ Flynn is credited with ninty-one votes
while John Power got only fifteen. The
3 highest democrat 10 Flynn got only some
thing like seventy, and the observers OF the
, canvass wondered II lot Of republicans
had not taken democratic ballots and
i hornswoggled the returns.
o The majorities OF the successful candi
dates. as returned by the board. are Hav
! erly. ss2; Leslie, BIS; Mcdonald, 4Os; Crsw
, | 10fd, hs, beal, Al, bralley, 800 BOWEL
| abs; IRE, 81.
: The corrected vote for justice OF thI
: peace. which was somewhat in doubt un
III the conclusion OF the canvass, is: Eos
n ter. 2S1; Long, S124; Eastman, S,O24
! Altstadt, AN; CockreH, 2s54; Baldwin, ?
262 Anderson, 22si; Fields. 2z2; Baehman
z 2OS5; Kubat, 1892
a In the constable race. Casey and Nc
= Ginnis, now holding ONCE lose out IN favo
OF Wickersham and Nielsen. new aspirants
e The four other successful constable candl
q dates are Church, Hensel, Simpson and
: Stein.
On the democratic contests, Flynn win
= for sheriff by ssl and Hubbard for polio
: judge by 600.
AGAINST TWO lei EPHnNES