Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1907-01-09

three men whose names appear signed
on the ballots do not belong to the 400
OF the State of Maine Mr.. Hemenway
has been town clerk u years.
Those three signed votes were cast
about noon time. somewhere probably
from II O'Clock to l.
Mr. Haines then presented an argu-
ment that those three signed ballots
We're good, that they were not signed
by the voluntary act Of the voters
but by order of the seIectman who
controlled the voter, and that mans
franchise cannot be nvalidated by an
unlawful act or order of an election
officer
Mr.. Williamson took up the question
for Mr.. Rtardon. saying that if the de-
tention OF the voters were followed il
WoulG be found that not only Mr. Rear
don but one other Kennebec county
Democrat, Thomas J. Lynch of Angus
ia. was elected senator.
Ballot No. ! has crosses in the DEM
otratic and Socialist columns. and Mr.
" illianson read the law which forbi,ls
counting ballot cast for two cand-
dates Tor the same Office. He contend
ed that there We're no Socialist nomi-
nees for senators and that the vote
was good for the Democratic candi-
oates for that office.
40. has d cross in the Democratic
column and cross opposite each name
in the column. THE voter meant all
right sad Mr.. Williamson.
Mr.. Williamson then proceeded t.
make the argument that Mr. Meader.
Cfh colo II;
Ace, had caused those three men, Hen
ry, Jones and Davis, to write their
names Oh ballots for the same pur-
pose. we 90 not ask that those bal
lots be rejected as having distinguish
ing marks, but as fraudulent" said
Mr.. Williamson.
NO. ) Was Democratic with some Re-
publican names crossed out, and NJ
Williamson said that The intent of the
voter was clear. and there was moth
ing Illegal about it.
No. 4 WAS Democratic with the name
James blanchard in the place for coun-
~ attorney.
No. , WAS Democratic with the word
yes written alongside the cross. The
voters intention is all right, but is
there any evidence that that word was
placed there to dist inguish the ballot,
asked Mr.. Williamson
Nos. :, and 10 were the signed bal
lets which he had discussed
No. WAS Republic IN with the names
of Aver and HeSeltOn crossed out, said
Mr. Williamson, and possible it WAS
meant to cross out the name of Fred
1. Brown but that is immaterial
No. IL is DEMO- rat ic with a cross on
the back in addition to that on the
front. IL IS also Il split vote, the
name of Meader appearing for Repre-
sentative said the attorney.
MIR. Heath then began his argument
He repeated Mr.. HaineS' claim as to
signed ballots. and said that Mr.. Will
hanson > position was !. contradictory
one. he wanting to count Democrat ic
.otrs and reject Republican votes and
To interpret the law according to his
partisan need in each case
He read Il large number of legal de-
ciSlonS and statutes, but relied princi-
rally upon the statute of 1903. apply
ing the Old law of the voters intent to
the interpretation Of Australian bal
| lots, and then saying that there is no
decision that Will bear upon the right
| interprt tHtion Of the Maine statute of
| l'0" on this important matter, a mat
| ter which is not only Important but
material.
Going over the list or II ballots he
argued that the present law would per-
NIT only one OF them to be rejected
as having Il vital defect. and that wa.
the ballot cast for two parties, the So
| cialiSt and Democratic.
At the close of Mr.. IIcath'S eXhaus-
| tive argument the committee went in
| to executive session. AT its close
Chairman Hastings announced that the
action Of the executive session would
| be made public ut the next session OF
| the committee on Wednesday after
noon, Jan. 9. at 3 o'clock