The Hawaiian gazette. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1865-1918, 1906-12-04

he ballots. the case would be different.
Brown had exhausted his information
md was still one vote short. That |
Tort of thing made 1t easy for anyone
% get a recount. He says there Is one
,ote wrong in a precinct and then finds
something that he did not expect.
Iaukea in the process was shut out
rom selecting precincts. There were
,nly two votes left as claimed in
information and with regard
to waialua the grounds were not COW
cred In the petition. or course 1t was
in the interests of Brown to continue,
but the law did not contemplate such
A fishing excursion. They might run
neck and neck to Christmas. laukea
being one ahead to start with. With
the Kaxaako experiment 1t was prom
Using for Brown.
GEARS REPLY.
Geo. d. Gear submitted that the sta
tus of the case required that the count
should go on. Kinney had admitted
that with only three precincts gone
Iaukea's majority was cut
down from fourteen to one. In Ka-
kaako IA ballots were shown improper
ly voted for Iaukea. True, six were
improperly voted for Brown, but so far
as the count had gone Irregularities
had been shown, proving that proper
count of ballots was not had in Nov
ember. Twenty-three of Iaukea's bal
lots were judicially declared improper
ly counted. How then could the court
allow 1t to go on record that Iaukea
had been elected by a majority OF IA.
when the court knew he had no such
The court must see that
the result would be greatly changed.
1t was not shown that the tabulation
Of votes was incorrect. Iaukea was
now entitled to certification Of election
by a majority of only one. This was
not a matter for Brown and Iaukea
alone. but the community had a right
to know who had a majority of legal
votes.
There were seven votes for Brown
in the Kakaako bag which had not
been counted-ballots cast for Brown
which were not read off or IL read off
were not counted for him. If the
,ourt was considering whether Brown
was justified in asking for recount,
the court would not take into consid-
grafton the votes wrongly counted for
Brown. 1t should only take his bal
OTIS. Kinneys argument was not legal
where he said Brown might lose as
many votes as Iaukea, when the IN
on Pauoa was that votes
were counted there for Iaukea which
were marked in any kind of irregular
way. The only way the controversy
could be settled was by computation
Of the legal ballots cast.
If Brown had illegal votes the fact
lid not show that he had not correct
From its own inherent
sense of justice the court should pro-
ceed with the investigation. To stop
the count now would be an injustice
10 Brown and to the community.
CoLLOQUY ENSUES.
Justice Hartwell asked If there was
any difference as to the right to re-
count between case where the ma
Iority was close and where it was not.
Mr.. Gear had not looked that matter
Up. 1t was question of law.
Justice Hartwell said he was not
asking it as question of law.
Then l will answer yes" Mr.. Gear
said. LAS matter of justice there is
difference in favor of recount when
he election is Close
Justice Hartwe!l observed that there
we're some irregularities in all cleo
ions What kind of Irregularities
would invalidate an election?
Mr.. Gear answered that Irregularities
hat did not change the result should
lot void the election. If the same
number of votes We're Illegal on both
tides the election was not invalidated.
, count could only affect the candi-
late whose election was contested. If
.aukea had one of majority on the
ecount he would be elected.
KINNEY COMES BACK.
Mr.. Kinney asked if the case closed
low where would 1t stand. AS the
ase stood Brown did not know whether
lie had majority or not. He had not
wen heard that he had majority of
he votes cast. He was given the OPP
,ortunity to give the name and the
of any informant, and put
ing everything down he had not the
lldl lie ltu
# legal votes. He might fill reams Of
,aper with assertions, but when he
summed up If he could not say of his
or information that he was
elected there was nothing to be inves-
igated. He limited himself to seven
precincts. Then he wanted to go out
IN an expedition founded on no knowl- !
dge or information. He had gone from
to hearsay. In talking
bout the votes Illegally counted for
aukea he ignored the position he oc-
upied of having to stop where his in
ended.
on the claim set up for doing justice,
living effect to the will of the voter,
he less Brown said about that the bet
err Ballot after ballot for Iaukea had
zen thrown out on account of little
cratch on the paper, Brown was
landing there on technical errors. BY
hat same law Mr.. Kinney contended
hat Brown, having ceased his infor-
nation, was stopped from going fur
her.
To go further was to change the law
or contest to law for a recount.
t was now only gambling PROPOSE
lon. Brown had taken a position with
egard to his oath on the stand which
i'd him credit, but he should be