Evening times-Republican., 1911-06-07
PETITIONS MAJORITY is
CUT DOWN TO SEVENTY SIX
One Hundred TwentyFour Names
Stricken off During Tuesdays Hear
ins-Continue Making Legal Obicc-
tions Today-Board's Revised Count
Gives Total of 1888 Names.


From an original majority of PIT.
when the board of supervisors began
to canvass the petition of consent Mon
day afternoon, to a majority of but
seventy-siX at noon today, marks the
inroads made on the saloons right to
do business after July 1 by the at
torneys representing the Marshall
County Citizens Association in ap-
proximately thirty-six hours.
With abundant ammunition left for
additional attacks on the petition the
dry attorneys began to be of the
opinion at noon that it might not be
necessary to submit withdrawals to the
board. They expressed confidence that
they would be able to beat the petition
solely by legal objections.
Revise Count of Petition.
BY a rechecking of the count of the
names on the petition. which was made
by the supervisors and County Auditor
A H. Welker, it was found an error Of
twenty-seven names had been made,
which favored the "drys, and was
against the saloons. The original count
was 1747 to which was added nine
more claimed by the saloonists' at
torneys, making a total Of 1876. The
revised count gave total of LIZA to
which was added the nine claimed by
the "wets,' making the corrected total
1888 instead of 1856. The error was
discovered when the county auditor
checked his totals of the 263 sections as
he had added them on the adding ma
chine. a transposition of figures was
found that made the difference Of twen-
ty-seven.
Many Taken Off.
Up to the time the board adjourned
! Tuesday evening the dry" attorneys
had begun to make large holes in the
petition During the day 124 names
had been stricken from the petition by
| the supervisors on objections made by
the contestants. The saloon attorneys
made no contest on a great many OF
| these names, admitting that they
should go off the petition This fore
Moons session resulted In seventeen
more names being stricken off because
| of legal objections. Slower progress
was made this morning, as much time
was consumed in argument, wranglins
of the lawyers, and reading court de-
/ cisions to the supervisors.
| Ninety-Five Dupiications.
Beginning with the claim that there
| were many Implications, and starting
| with the list on which there were nine
ty-eignt that We're claimed to be such,
by the time the list had been gone thru
with the supervisors had stricken off
of the petition ninety-five of them
Three were passed as being in doubt
The "wets" admitted that a great
many Of these names should come off
and raised no contest to their removal
Other Names Removed.
The next attack Of the "drys" was
under what they have called their eX-
hibit b it being list Of names al
! legged not to be on the poll books. Ir
most Of the instances the correspond
ing identical name that was on the
petition could not be found in the wart
poll book where the petition alleged
the signer voted. In some cases the
registry number of the signer was
/ found to be the registry number of a
voter who had not signed. In sue
cases the name was stricken off. In
other Instances the name on the petit
ton and the poll list was not identi-
cal, and they We're stricken off. Fol-
these various causes twenty-seven ad-
ditional names were removed.
Nineteen More Stricken Off.
Finishing the attack under exhibit
"B" the drys opened under exhibi
"C' late Tuesday afternoon. The latter
is long list of names alleged to not
be identical with the names on the pol
list Two Of these names were re-
moved before adjournment in the eve
| ming and seventeen more were stricken
eff during the hearing this morning.
The contest over this class Of names
was with especial regard to differences
in the given name and middle initial
! Long arguments on this point took ur
much time this morning, but the SUI
pervisors ruled that where, for instance
a name appeared as William H. on the
| petition and was signed w. II. on the
poll book the name should be stricken
off The decision being that there was
no means of telling whether the w
H. of the poll list meant William H o,
the petition or some other given name
Thsi ruling affected a dozen or more
names. The board ruled that where
the given name and initial were used
or just the initials were signed they
must be identical on both the petition
and the poll book.
Bring Up Forgery Case.
/ The first case Of alleged forgery in
the signing OF a name on the petition
was developed by the dry" lawyers
shortly before the hearing adjourned
for lunch It. H. Meickley was brought
! before the board and asked If he signed
! the petition. He denied that he did. He
was asked if John j. Pink, whose sig
nature was opposite Meickley's on the
petition as the witness, had ever talk
| ed with him about the signing Of the
petition. He said he never had and
| knew nothing as to who might have
| put his name there.
| Bradford announced that he would
| produce witnesses when the proper
time arrived to prove that Meickley
signed the petition. The board ad-
journed without passing on the name.