The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1905-06-12
JUDGE ERICKSON
T0ASTS OFFICERS
Sanpete Election Report Is Analyzed
IN Court.
PECULIARITIES SHOWN UP
FINDINGS OF SHERIFF AND The
COUNTY ATTORNEY.
Special to The Herald1

Manti, June let viii be remembered
that some time ago the county attorney
of Sanpete, together with the sheriff
submitted u report to the county COM
missioners relating to election frauds in
Sanpete county, which was published in
The Herald. This morning from the bench
Judge Ferdinand Erickson expressed him
self upon this matter as foHows:
The court feels called upon before
the adjournment of this term. TO make
some comment upon the official report
recently submitted by the county atto.-
ney OF this county To the honorable board
of county commissioners. IN which he at
tempts to excuse himself for not bring
ing criminal proceedings against parties
suspected Of fraudulent and unlawful
acts during the last election. especially
affecting the election of the district
judge.
IN his said report he says: Tine sheriff
of the county, Mr.. hHucseu and myself
have investigated the matter as fully as
available information viii permit and
We are satisfied that said alleged frauds
have been committed. and then further
on ne declares We are unable TO get a
sCintilla Of evidence that would indicate
that the Judges of election in any of the
precincts tampercd with the ballots He
spends considerable time in divertin@ at
tCutIOa from the only suspicious circuTn-
stance that developed during the recount
of the ballots by the court while the con-
tried. by calling attention to slight dis
CTepancles between alleged statements
made by some of the election Judges in
two voting districts as to doubtful bal
lots having been counted for the con-
teStee and the actual condition found BY
the court upon the recount. arriving at
the conclusion that this was sufficient
proof that fraud had been committed
after the ballots had been deposited with
the county clerk and completely exOner-
ating the judges Of election of any wrong
doing He also says IN precinct No. ;
in Mauti Mr.. Erickson gained 4 votes on
the recount in precinct No. !. MI. Pleas
ant, Mr. Livingston gained Il votes on
the recount putting these two diScrep-
aucieS on the same common ground and
giving out the impression that if fraud
was perpetrated in one Of these voting
districts the same must be true of the
other. Now. what. are the facts relative
to these last two named diStTiCts2 The
official returns of the election Judges of
district No I, Mt Pleasant, give Mr..
Livingston % votes. and MIR. Erickson
$50 votes. Upon the recount Mr.. Living
StOn was given % votes, Il gain of I,
whilst Mr- Erickson received I5I votes,
with l. ballots that were laid one side
because Of some technical defect in mark
ing under a legal construction, but which
had been intended for Mr. Erickson and
SO counted by the judges of election. and
they were never passed on by the court;
whilst in the Third district of Nanti. the
judges of election by their official returns
gave Mr.. Livingston 146 and Mr.. Erickson
81 votes, and when this district was re-
counted by the court Mr. Livingston was
found to have 10 and Mr. Erickson IS.
making a difference Of y between the
returns made by the judges of election
and the recount made by the court Out
of these p votes but two We're challenged
ballots. Mr. Livingston having been cred
tied with u votes never cast at all and
the other Z being votes cast for Mr..
Erickson and not counted for him by
the Judges of election From this il will
be seen that the county attorney is un-
able (Or unwilling to discriminate be
tween a challenged ballot and no vote at
all. or one east but not counter or in
other words. he regards d challenged
vote as being no better than stolen
vote. When his attention was called TO
this feature of his report he admitted
that he had never before heard that that
distinction existed. and yet he claims to
have made an investigation of the al
legged frauds.
Report Not Fair.