The San Francisco call., 1909-11-21

Basing their claims on allegations
Of gross mistakes by election Off
cials the friends of Supervisors James
ing that they demand a recount. which
it is contended would unseat at least
two Of the union labor party super
visors elect and result in putting Booth
and Payot on the new board.
Neither Booth or Payot IS willing to
demand a recount, but a snap tally
will be taken when the ballots are
opened for the promised Sullivan-Con-
Ian recount and If there is evidence of
the mistakes alleged by the proponents
of the recount an action viii be brought
which may change materially the COM
pleXion of the new board of super
visors as indicated on the face of the
returns
A change of 175 votes would put
Payot in the lead over O'Dowd and
change Of less than $50 would do the
same for Booth. The proponents of the
recount contend that the mistakes
which they insist were made might
easily result in throwing out 1000 or
more union labor ballots in so far as
they affect the supervisorial vote.
They contend that hundreds of union
ballots with a cross in the party circle
attempted TO split their ballots by
marking a cross after the name of
Oscar Hooks in the democratic column.
They assert that the election officials
instead of throwing out the whole vote
for supervisors on such ballots counted
the vote for Hooks and for all the
union labor candidates except the one
whose name appeared on the ballot op
pOsite the name of Hooks.
VOTE WOULD BE INVALID
AS a matter of law, if the ballots
were marked as it is contended they
We're, the whole supervisorial vote of
the mistaken electors was invalid The
election officials had no means of ascer-
tanning the intent of the voters as to
which of the union labor candidates
they desired to scratch. In effect the
elector voted for 19 candidates for SUI
pervisors and the judges of election
had no right to count the vote for any
of the supervisorial candidates on a
ticket so marked. IT is estimated that
there were $4,000 straight union labor
ballots cast and that the alleged mis-
take might result in the rejection of
from 500 to 1000 of them.
Speculation touching the organlza-
tion of the new board of supervisors
has claimed the spotlight section on
the local political stage. since it was
semioficially announced that the union
labor party supervisors elect would
go into caucus this week for the pur-
pose of cutting up the committee and
patronage pie.
1t is generally conceded that r. J.
Loughery, who enjoys the honor of
leading in the supervisorial poll, will
be the head of the new finance COM
mittee. As a former supervisor he
was a member of the finance commit
foo he IT, h.
new majority with any experience in
the work of this most trying and most
important of the supervisorial sub
organizations.
Charles A. Nelson. who made a splen-
did record in the last legislature and
who ran Loughery a close second, is
candidate for the chairmanship of
the public utilities committee and is
said to be in more than a fair way
of getting the desired berth. Nelson
is a vigorous champion of the Hetch
Hetchy project and has very pro-
nounced views on the subject of water
and gas rates
HAGERTY MAY SUCCEED BEHAN
John L. Herget is looked upon as
one Of the powers in the new board
and is persistently mentioned in con-
nection with the craftsmanship of the
police committee. Among those lin
the know II Is generally cOnceued
that William Ha gerty, chairman of
the union labor county committee, will
succeed Clerk Behan. Hagerty was
for a time a candidate for the chief
clerkship in the office of District At
torney Elect Fickert. 1t was given
out that Hagerty would be content
with the salary of $3.50 a month, since
it would give him an opportunity to
study law. The clerk of the board of
supervisors draws down $500 a month
and the chief clerkship under Fickert
has gone to another, anyhow, which
may explain the change in Hagerty's |
plans which became apparent 10 days
ago.