Santa Fe new Mexican. [volume] (Santa Fe, N.M.) 1898-1951, 1911-12-29
JUDGE ROBERTS
MAKES DECISION
Upholds Contentious of Dem.
ocrats in Clayton Pre-.
cinct Dispute
ELECTION BOARD MUST SIGN
Shameful State Of Affairs Dis
closed by Pleadings in the
Matter.

j.
decision in the dispute over the Clay
ton election returns which had been
argued before him yesterday. The
decision lpholds the contention of
the Democrats IN so far as to order
the two judges and the clerk of elec-
ton who had refused to sign the re-
turns from Clayton. Precinct no. 1,
Union county, to sign the returns.
Election Judge Eaton, is the only one
of the recalcitrant election officials in
Santa Fe at present but his ignature
alone was needed as the Democratic
Judge and clerk had already signed.
The other judge and clerk at Clayton
will sign the returns later, but Eat
ons signature will clear the way
for the canvassing board to complete
its labors.
Proclamation Next Wednesday.
1t is now planned to have the elec-
ton certificate finished and signed by
tomorrow evening. This is a labor
ious task, as in this official certificate
to President Taft, the vote of each
candidate, state, district and county,
is given, necessitating the engrossing
OF thousand names with the vote
for each. The returns will be taken
to Washington tomorrow night by
Congressman Elect George Curry, who
is at present at Tularosa, and H. B.
Ferguson of Albuquerque The certi-
ficate will be presented to President
Taft on next Wednesday; at least, SO
it is planned, ead the proclamation
will issue forth, barring accidents.
Lieb Elected.
Counting in Clayton precinct made
no change in the general result, ex-
cept to elect r. d. Lieb district Judge
over Reed Holloman by SO majority:
J. D. Casados member of the house
over ]. P. ODeil by 9 majority, and
electing most of the Democratic can
didates for county Office in Union
county The vote for Judge in the
district was as follows:
Taos-Holloman, 1921; Lieb, 979.
Colfax-Holloman 1890; Lieb, 1871
union-Holloman, 1852: Lieb, 1887,
Quay-Holloman, 92S; Lieb, 1877.
Total-Holloman, 5291; Lieb, 1924.
The vote for Casados was 1881. for
O'Dell 1922
The opinion by Judge Roberts is
as follows:
Territory of New Mexico,
County of Union,
Fourth Judicial District.
In re proceedings instituted by the
State Board of Canvassers to COM
pei Gus NJ. Brass, William ]. Eaton,
judges OF election of precinct No. 1
Union County, and Oscar H. Lundy,
Clerk of election in said precinct,
to certify and sign the return of
the votes cast in said precinct at
the election held on the 7th Cay of
November, 1911.
The canvassing board prescribed
and designated by the Enabling Act
and the Constitution of the State of
New Mexico to canvass and certify
the results of the election held No
vember 7th, 1911, in the discharge of
its duties was unable to canvass the
votes cast in precinct No. 1, Union
County, New Mexico, for the reason
that the Judges and Clerks of said
election had not made out the certif.
icates and signed the same showing
the vote received by each candidate.
1t was agreed by the attorneys repre-
senting the two political parties in
terested that the state canvassing
board, under the Enabling Act and the
provisions of the Constitution. had
and possessed all the powers conferr-
ed upon Boards of County Commis-
sioners when sitting as Canvassing
Boards under the laws of the Terri
tory Of New Mexico. The State
Board Of Canvassers thereupon, under
the provisions of Sec. 1910 r. S. 1897,
caused subpoenaes to issue for said
election officials. who appeared before
the State Canvassing Board and re-
fused to fill out the certificates and
certify the same. Thereupon said
Canvassing Board, under the provision
OF Sec. 1641, certified its proceedings
in the matter to the District Court of
Union County and an attachment was
issued for said election officials and
they were brought before the Court.
The judges and clerks of election in
terposed an answer or return to said
attachment, setting forth their reasons
for their refusal to sign and certify
the result Of said election, and refused
to sign the same. In their return ten
reasons are set forth, which are as
follows:
Il. The judges and clerks Of elec-
ton were threatened with arrest and
intimidated in various other ways BY
an armed deputy sheriff with the con
nivance Of the sheriff, to such an ex-
tent that they were afraid to perform
their duties.
"2. Legal voters were threatened
BY the deputy sheriff that II they vot-
ed they would be arretsed, and when
they did vote were actually arrested
within the ropes and thrown In jail.
by use Of warrants drawn before any
[,
| Continued on Page seven.)