The Hawaiian star. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu]) 1893-1912, 1906-12-10
MAY CARRY
CONTEST TO
WASHINGTON
SHERIFF A. NJ. BROWN WILL CON-
FORE ADMITTING DEFEAT.

Although the Supreme Court has de-
cided the election contest in favor of
Curtis p. Iaukea the Democratic res
pendent, the matter is not entirely set
tied, A. NJ. Brown the contestant has
not given up the struggle and before he
Will concede his final defeat, he and his
attorneys will have a consultation. The
purpose of such consultation is to de-
termine whether there be any further
grounds for continuing the contest and
whether Brown would be warranted
under all the circumstances in trying to
retain his office of Sheriff of oahu
County
The ruling made by the Supreme
Court last Saturday to count a parti-
cular class Of rejected ballots, a ruling
that insured the victory to Iaukea,
caused a great deal of surprise. 1t
was a severe blow to Browns attorneys
and to Brown himself. The contestant
had felt reasonably sure of being de-
clared the winner by the court, after
the case had been finally submitted last
Wednesday afternoon. Many had
forgotten about the point w. A. Kin
ney in behalf of Iaukea, had raised
against the rejection of ballots where
more names than offices to fill had
been voted for, except in the case of
the office for sheriff. Kinney admitted
that where both Iaukea and Brown had
been voted for the ballot should be
thrown out. When the court decided
to sustain Kinney's objection, the cleo
ton of Iaukea was then conceded.
Naturally the ruling and the subse-
quent decision today caused the great
est satisfaction to the Democrats and
to that element of the community or
dinarily Republican, that had support
ed Iaukea. But to the other side the
ruling has been severely criticised.
There are two grounds upon which
| the Supreme Courts ruling is criticised
One is the fact that the court made a
ruling in the Fernandez-Adams contest
last year that if sustained, would have
beaten Kinney. The other ground is
the fact that it is claimed that Chief
| Justice Frear stated in effect, previous
| to the recent election that the ballots
when marked for more men than Of
! fees to be filled should be rejected. 1t
Is stated that S. H. Derby one of the
/ inspectors of election, went to the Chief
Justice and asked him relative to this
point. He was informed by the Chief
Justice that the ballots should be re-
/ jected. Derby who was accompanied
/ by another inspector, then went to the
office of Governor Carter and informed
the governor who instructed all of the
other inspectors to follow the ruling
g - no c
not given by the Chief Justice from the
bench however.
It is claimed from the Brown side
that as the result of the last ruling
every other candidate elected was IL
legally deprived of votes due him and
the rest of the election was therefore
held under condition that is at total
variance with the final ruling by the
court.
Whether this claim can be used as
ground for taking an appeal to the
United States Supreme Court is uncer-
tain. But it will in connection with
other features of the opinion, be con-
sidered.
Whether Brown wi.i take HIS contest
to the Supreme Court at Washington
is undetermined. Litigation before the
U. S. Washington tribunal is very slow
and it may extend over the two years
term to which Iaukea now holds the
certificate of election. The Democrats
feel confident that whether the appeal
be taken of not, Iaukea holds the GER
tificate of election and will take Of
flee, whereas even if Brown should
s,l,s,
tribunal, it will do him but little good,
as he might not even get his decision
in time to hold office during the two
year term now in litigation.