The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1905-06-12
Report Not Fair.

Another remarkable finding i'm this
most remarkable rapport IS that all double
ballots reported 20 NthC county attorney
in making his Investigations had been
counted by the election judges for the
coutcstce. Mr. Erickson. and that these
double ballots were not found in the
pouches at the recount Had he been
disposed to make "a fair and impartial in
VcstigatiOu the report would have said
that double ballots were found upon the
recount in majority of the voting dis
tricts and as nearly as could be aScCr-
tanned they had been counted for neither
candidate, as the law provides: that the
evident intention OF the voters IL a great
majority OF instances was to vote for
the cOntestee, and that the numerous re-
ports of double ballots being counted for
Mr. Livingston failed to show up at the
recount. just the same as those reported
having been counted for 41r. Erickson.
showing COncIusively that the judges of
election in their desire to encourage both
contestant and COnteStee had been mis-
taken in their reports made to both can
didates He also states IN his report that
2 w. Eliason. the clerk of Sanpete cOun-
ty. swOTG at the contested election case
that the pouch showing the returns from
precinct No. 3. Mt. Pleasant, had been
dropped by him and torn, but he said
that il had been torn more IN some way
unknown to him since ne dropped it. But
IL this connection he fails to state that
the ballots in this pouch were not counted
II aA-
its condition 1t was incompetent 10 i'm
peach the returns made BY the election
Judges The clerks explanation was en-
tireIv satisfactory, and the imputatiou
that that pouch had been tempered with
by officers at the court house is wholly
Unwarranted by any disclosures made
upon the recount Of the ballots And who
can say, if this particular pouch had been
gone into and the ballots recounted, any
discrepancies would have appeared
Two Opposing Views.
'iAgain the report says: The judges
of election in all the precincts say that
they have no reason to suspect any one
or more Of their number, from anything
that was said or done during the count
ing OF the ballots or at any time, of the
tampering in any way with the ballots
ana We are unable 10 get a scintilla of
evidence that would indicate that the
judges of election in any of the said
precincts tempered with the ballots We
nave been unable to set any evidence
whatever up to date that points TO the
guilt Of any particular person or per
sons and then in the next sentence he
says he has requested the judge to call
Grand jury to fully investigate the mat
ter. Investigate what, pray2 When the
officers whose duty It Is to ferret out
crime and produce evidence before the
grand jury say they are unable TO get
any evidence whatever that points To the
guilt of any particular person or persons
and not SClntfid OF evidence tnaN would
indicate that the judges OF election in any
OF the precincts tempered with the bal
lots2 Under the law il requires more posi-
tive evidence to warrant a grand jury
in presenting an indictment against a
person than would be necessary TO war
rant a MAGISTRATE to hold him 10 answer
to the district court The grand jury can
iEdict only when all the evidence before
them. taken together, if unexplained OF
uncontradicted would. in their judgment,
warrant a. conviction by a trial jury :;
whilst a committing magistrate can or
der "A defendant held to answer to the
district court when it appears to him
from the examination that public Of
fence has been committed, and that there
is sufficient cause TO believe the defend
ant guilty thereof Now if the sheriff
and the county attorney have been unable
to get evidence sufficient to warrant
bringing an action before a magistrate.
what rood would il do to call a grand
jury. Involving great expense TO the
state when the officers. whose duty it is
TO furnish evidence for the jury TO con-
slider say they have no evidence When
this court calls grand Jury in this class
Of crimes IL viii be upon the assurance
that the prosecuting officers are unable,
or uuwilNns. TO cope with The situation
and when they are in good faith desirous
of ipdictinE some person or persons sus-
peCted Of crime. but not when the court