The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1906-12-01


court was considering whether Brow
| was justified il asking for a recoun
the court would not take into consid
Grafton the votes wrongly counted fo
Brown. 1t should only take his bal
lots. Kinney's argument was not lega
where he said Brown might lose a
many votes as Iaukea. when the in
formation on Pauoa was that vote
/ were counted there for Iaukea whic
We're marked in any kind of irregula
way. The only way the controvers,
| could be settled was by a computation
of the legal ballots cast.
If Brown had illegal votes the fac
did not show that he had not correc
information. From its own inheren
sense of justice the court should pro
coed with the investigation. To stor
the count now would be an injustice
to Brown and to the community.
COLLOQUY ENSUES.
Justice HartweIl asked if there was
any difference as to the right to a re-
count between a case where the ma
jority was close and where it was not.
Mr.. Gear had not looked that matter
up. 1t was question of law.
Justice HartwelI said he was not
asking it as question of law.
Then I will answer yes" Mr.. Gear
said. LAS a matter of justice there is
a difference in favor of recount when
the election is close
Justice HartweI1 observed that there
were some irregularities in all cleo
tons What kind of irregularities
would invalidate an election?
Mr.. Gear answered that Irregularities
that dii not change the result should
rot void the election. If the same
number of votes were illegal on both
sides the election was not invalidated.
A count could only affect the candi-
date whose election was contested. If
Iaukea had one of i majority on the
recount he would be elected.
KINNEY COMES BACK.
Mr. Kinney asked if the case closed
now where would it stand. AS the
case stood Brown did not know whether
he had majority or not. He had not
even heard that he had a majority of
the votes cast. He was given the OPP
portunity to give the name and the
of any informant, and put
ting everything down he had not the
that he had the majority
IF legal votes. He might fill reams of
paper with assertions, but when he
up if he could not say of his
knowledge 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
about the votes illegally counted for
aukea he ignored the position he oc-
;upied of having to stop where his in
ormation ended
On the claim set up for doing justice,
giving effect to the will of the voter,
he less Brown said about that the bet
er. Ballot after ballot for Iaukea had
'een thrown out ON account of a 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 a contest to a law for a recount.
t was now only gambling PROPOSE
ion. Brown had taken a position with
egard to his oath on the stand which
id him credit, but he should be
topped from going any further than
nat position. His counsel was going
lrther than Arthur Brown himself
as willing to go.
THE COUNT PROCEEDS.
The court will proceed with the
auoa precinct the Chief Justice an
ounced after a consultation of ten
linutes with his associates.
This is the Ninth Precinct OF the
ourth District. George G. Potter,
hartman of inspectors. examined the
eals and reported them intact They
ere impressed with his private seal. 4
1t was about five o'clock when the
blowing result was announced: