The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1906-11-30
THE Law OF ELEC TION CONTESTS
i Admits IF Foolish and Unsupported Charge. Against
Che Integrity Of Election Judges The Case in the
Thirteenth lard Changes in the Law Desirable.

ton, and with the disputed votes
which his attorneys claimed for him, he :
had the same majority as found by. the
judges and clerks. The contest apz
parently was not based on any evi.
dence at Eall. The alleged Sc votes.
cast for Roberts and not counted for
him were not found. Nothing was
heard from the 81 qualified electors
whose votes were alleged to have been
The ease with which this contest was
gotten into-court suggests the advisa-
bilitY of amending the law SO that a
person proposing to contest an election
shall be obliged to support his allega-
tons with affidavits showing the prob
able truth Of his charges. Where there
are only fewsyotes between candi-
| dates there is usually some such evil
dence to be had. Thought reasonably
to be required that this should be pro-
duced. It hardly seems sufficient that
contestant should have the run of the
courts merely because the election was
doubts upon the integrity of Judges
merely because he was defeated by
small vote.
1t might be said that this is one side
Of it and that the Comstock-ElWen case
illustrates the other side. There the
nomination apparently went to Com
! STOCK on close vote, but on recount
! ElWeII was shown to have been nomi-
mated mated. 1t might be argued that had
made difficult the wrong man would
! nave received the office in that case
Put. this leaves out of consideration the
! TACT that Elwell could and did present
probable evidence of mistakes in the
count and In the. vote which would
change the result. Had lie not been
able to show some reason other than
the closenesss of the vote for recount
| the case would have been Just like the
thirteenth. ward contest In the latter
case none Of the contentious of the
beaten party were sustained in court
and none of them were supplemented
with atfidavits indicating that they
could be sustained. "
The courts might easily be clogged
with such cases under the present law,
because it is neither expensive to4in-
dulge in the luxury of a contest nor
goes 1t apparently require, much pre-
llmiInary work in the way of securing
evidence of irregularities or fraud.
meanwhile, the Roberts contest has
Ing IN tine, thirteenth ward. The noun.
tain of charges against the integrity
OF the count and the mouse Of proof
of the charges in court has aroused the
are OF the gentlemen who constituted
the voting and canvassing boards.FThey
number something over sixty Of the
most active men in the ward. and thew
are; eagerly, looking. for the influence
back of this contest and are anxious to
/ meet up - with the individual who let
loose his Imagination upon the contest.
| George S. Grimes represented Roberts
| IN court, but it is not supposed that he
did anything but make up in legal form
the case brought to him by his client.
Roberts is an unknown man in the
thirteenth ward and the only cause he
can have for surprise is that he received
as many votes as he did. It is not be-
lleved he. was more than the formal
sponsor for the contest. It is believed.
that there is 4; political influence: in
the ward which backed Roberts for cleo
ton for a purpose of its own. and that
this same Influence will exert itself to
control the nomination of a successor
to Alderman Frank Schoonmaker. Mr..
Schoonmaker could succeed himself if
he would say the word but everything
lhe has said heretofore points the other
IswaY. So the spectacle is seen of the
campaign for alderman two years hence
d.beginning with the count of the vote
this year. This also explains the eager
ness OF some men to learn who was
back of the recount charges. They say
that no such man will be alderman from
the thirteenth with their help or their
consent. .,..g.,r. ..,