The Monmouth inquirer., 1905-12-14
Nothing Exciting in Recount.

The recount of the vote for sheriff
went on Friday in about the same
old way The Election Board con ven
ed at 8 30 A. NJ. ami commenced on the
first district Of Middletown. They
next took up the second district of
Middletown, which was partly finish
ed when they adjourned. No ma
terial gain or loss was made by either
candidate.
County board of election Tuesday
morning look up the recount of votes
cast in Englshtown borough, which
resulted in gain of two for Francis.
! The original returns from this voting
district gave Francis At and Close 65
votes, but at the conclusion of this
particular recount these figures were
reduced to AZ aud so, respectively. ow-
ing to protested Francis and IA
protested Close ballots. A number of
the rejected ballots were placed on
the doubtful list by technicalties adj
vanced by counsel for the two inter-
ested parties One of the ballots was
cut at the top and bottom, while on
Others the appropriation for a small
bulkhead in the borough were crossed
with lead pencil. The counting of
the votes from Matawan township
was then taken up. This district
origil ally gave Francis 80 and Close
246 votes.
One ballot ia the first 90 examined
was borough ticket instead of town.
ship. 1t was a Close ballot. La
number of instances during the re-
count borough ticket have been found
in the township boxes. Most of them
were Close ballots
A recount of the vote in Manalapan
township was made Monday after
noon of last week. The result was
loss of one vote for Close, in actual
figures and without reference to pro-
tested bnllots. Counsel for Close claim
that in reality he gained a number of
votes through Francis name being
mis-spelled more frequently thanithat
of Close. Friends of Mr.. Francis claim
ed before the recountiDg of the ballots
had begun that logical reasoning
would show the absurdity of the claims
made by Closes supporters that such
a procedure would result in overcoin-
ing Francis majority. They reasoned
that as Francis ran more than 2,00U
behind his ticket Mr.. Closes name
must surely be written in many more
times than Francis, and if that were
SO his name would naturally be miss
PEELED a correspondingly greater NUM-
Der of times
Counsel for Mr. Close knew that
Close pastors had been placed in the
hands of every voter in the county and
they relied on their being used. The
result of the recount thus far, they
claim, shows that their contention was
right. In most instances where Fran
els has been scratched a paster had
been used, but a number of ballots
which have been protested because Of
the abbreviation of Charles to ''Chas. .
will, it is claimed. be counted by JUS
tice Hendrickson when they are sub
mitted to him. Justice Hendrickson,
in similar contest in Salem county,
passed a large number of ballots as
legal in which the name Joseph had
been abbreviated to Jos" Justice
Hendrickson refers to the dictionary
and rules as legal all ballots bearing
names of candidates which have been
properly abbreviated.
The original returns from Manalapsn
township gave G. Asa Francis 1870 and
| Charles E. Close 1926. Tie result of the
recount was Francis, 10; Close. 1873;
protested ballots. Francis. SO; Close, 50.
There were also five rejected ballots on
| the returns made by the Manalapan
4 township election board All were for
Close and were straight tickets except
i ing that they were voted in the I'M
proper district. Four of the number
were Englishtown borough ballots and
one Allentown borough ballot. Eng
lisbtown is part of Manalapan town
ship, but the tickets differed IN thai the
names of candidates for borough offices
appeared on the borough tickets. AL
! lentown borough tickets are similar,
but just how Allentown borough tick
cts got so far away from home is q
mystery, as Allentown is about Il
miles distant.
The protests took much the same
lines as heretofore. One Close ballot
had IS. 81 on left side of ticket
] Charles Asa Francis name had been
crossed out and &c. E. Close" written
in. Another Francis ballot was pro-
| tested because the voter had crossed
the name of Oliver H. Brown. seua-
torial candidate. out and written in
"Dr. Kismet,n evidently intending to
vote for Hugh s. Kinnonth- The
4 greater number of protested ballots
j were for trivial causes, such as cross
ing out the sum stated on the ticket TO
be voted for appropriations for roads
and ways and means and substituting
another sum; improperly crossing of
the for or against the law reducing
the number of freeholders.' In most
instances only portion OF the ques-
| ton in either instance was marked.oH
and counsel. seeming to think IT their
business to protest, promptly did So
1t is conceded by counsel for both sides
thal this class of ballots will be count
ed by Justice Hendrickson. but still
they keep their good work. up.
The counting ofvotes still continue
at the Court House. In the I'd district
/ of Neptune, lbesid-s theprotested bal
lots, it stood Francis 1870 and Close 259-
Francis gained three votes in Allan
tic Highlands The original returns
! gave Francis 1Sl and Close 1875. The
recount put Closes vote at 1913 and sus-
| tanned Francis vote. The Third dis
trict of Neptune is now being counted.
During the month of December ia