The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1908-12-11
BAKER Of kauai
FILES DEMURRER
He Assigns Thirteen Reasons
Against a Recount for
Auditor.

A demurrer was filed in the Supreme
| Court Yesterday by George E. H. Baker
auditor-elect of Kauai County, to the
petition for contest and recount OF
Charles Blake. the Democratic candidate
for auditor of that county. George A
Davis and A. L. C. Atkinson appear as
attorneys for Baker.
Thirteen grounds of demurrer are al
legged. The first is the general allegation
that the petition does not state facts
sufficient to justify the granting of the
relief prayed for. The second is that
the petition is ambiguous, unintelligible
and uncertain in that it does not APP
pear from the petition that the inspec-
tors of election at the Lihue precinct
did not legally reject the five votes
which it is alleged were cast for Blake,
but were not counted for him, and be-
cause the reasons for rejecting those
five votes are not given, and because
it does not appear that any protest was
made on behalf of Blake at the time
the votes were counted.
The third ground of demurrer set
forth is that the petitioner has failed
to set forth specifically some good and
sufficient reason why the returns in this
precinct were false, fraudulent and I'M
true and to set forth why the votes
east for the petitioner, but not counted
for him, should have been counted for
him, and that a protest was made at
the time of the count.
The fourth ground of demurrer is
that the returns of the election officers
are conclusive and binding on the court
unless the petition diseloses the rea-
sons why the inspectors rejected the
five votes cast for Blake and not count
ed for him, and that it does not appear
that there were not good reasons for
rejecting the five votes mentioned.
The fifth ground of demurrer is that
the petition does not show that the
votes were not counted and returned in
accordance with the law of the land,
and that general allegations instead of
specific ones that the returns are false,
fraudulent and untrue will not author
ize an inspection of the ballots by the
court.
The sixth ground of demurrer is that
the ninth paragraph of the petition is
general and not specific. The seventh
ground is the same as the sixth except
that it is directed at the tenth para
graph of the petition.
The eighth ground is that the allega
lions of the petition are general and
not specific, and that under them the
petitioner is not entitled to any re-
count nor has the court any jnrisdic
ton to order and direct a recount, as
prayed for in the petition.
The ninth ground of demurrer is that
it does not appear from the petition
that the ballots cast for the two candi-
dates are in the same condition that
they were when they were counted, and
therefore the respondent is not called on
to answer.
The tenth ground is that under the
as a whole the petitioner is
not entitled to relief.
The eleventh is that no specific in
formation is given authorizing the re-
lief prayer for, and that the petition
is simply Gan attempt on the part of
the petitioner TO have the ballot boxes
opened and the ballots inspected for
the purpose of obtaining information
in the vain hope that evidence may be
secured which would authorize the court
to inspect said ballots, which the court
should not do without specific allega-
tions and full particulars furnished so
that respondent could answer the same. |
The twelfth ground is that the petit
TONER is not entitled to the relief pray
ed for or any relief under the statute
or otherwise.
The thirteenth ground is that the re-
turns of the election inspectors are con-
elusive and binding.