The Ordway new era., 1912-12-06
Reply Is Filed In
County-Seat Suit
Commissioners Deny Charges
and Allege Fraud on Part
of Contesting Parties

The answer to the complaint filed
by the Sugar City parties In the coun.
ty.seat matter. wherein the town to
our east asked that the recent elcc.
/tion be declared void, was iled by.
Attorneys Hicks and Stanley, acting
on behalf OF the county commission.
ers. the defendants In this suit, late
last Thursday. The attorneys for
the commissioners took full advant-
age OF the ten days allowed by law
for the filing OF this answer, and up
to the hour Of filing Sugar City had
not fled the cost bond running to the
defendants, as required by statute.
The answer Of the commissioners.
reduced to its smallest form, is as fol.
lows:
First-It is alleged In the answer
that the court Is without jurisdiction
because Of failure on the part OF COM
plainants to die an approved bond for
costs at the beginning Of the suit and
are therefore barred from ding this
bond now.
Second-The statute declares that
to be eligible to bring contest the
parties must be qualified electors"
and that Sugar City fails to qualify 10
this respect. as It is a municipality.
Third-The matter Of qualification
Of voters, brought up In the com.
plant, had already been tried In the
district court and adjudicated, and
all questions raised by the complaint
ant have been fully considered, passed
upon and settled by that court.
Fourth-The charge that large
number Of qualified voters we're re.
fused permission to vote is met by
the objection that no person or per-
SONS so refused are named, nor the
precincts 10 which refusal was made
named; .por are the registsy numhers
Of the persons alleged to have been
refused permission TO vote given.
Fifth-The allegation, that illegal
votes were received is not In compli-
ance with the statute, which requires
such votes to be named and mum.
bered.
Sixth-The charge that legal votes
we're reje It'd is open to the same Oh
lection as paragraphs.
Seventh-The charge that election
judges counted and returned votes
for Crdway which were not cast is
subject to the same objection that no
names are mentioned nor are pre-
cincts from which such count is alleg.
ed to have been returned given.
Eighth-That blank ballots we're
cast and wrongfully counted for Ord
way Is not supported by statements OF
which precincts they originated In, or
other details calculated to put con.
testee, the missioners, upon de.
fense.
Ninth-The allegation that legal
voters were prevented from voting by
intimidation. threats and fraud Is not
sufficiently specific nor is it IA reason
for contest.
Tenth-The ecountr statement OF at
t0rneys for the defense, consideration
Of which Is not asked, except in case
that the district court should er-
roneously take Jurisdiction, sets forth
that the names and numbers of forty
one voters are attached to the answer
which 1t is alleged are, were not en-
titled to vote. as well as many others
into whom it. was impossible
on account OF lack of time
to make close inquiry, aud while
all named may not prove illegal
there are enough which can be
to make it an assured fact that any
loss In other parts of the county In
favor of Ordway would be more than
offset by the illegal votes proven in
the precinct involved In this inquiry.
In fact, it is the belief of those well
Informed in the details OF the cleo
tion that not a single illegal or wrong
ful vote was cast for Ordway in the
recent election in the whole of Crow