The daily sentinel., 1914-01-06

OF extreme Importance in Mesa
county, where the taxpayers have
been engaged in a fight over county
division is the decision Judge John
+ A. Perry of Denver rendered in the
recent Alamosa county case, which
by the way was a complete vindica-
tion of Secretary of State Pearce,
who refused to accept. a rel eferendum
petition because 1t contained insuf-
ficient names. v
Various sensational charges were
made against the secretary of state
which were disproyed in the final de-
cision in the case.
The petitioners sought to prove
that the petition contained suffi-
cient number of names, to refer the
bill, but that portion of the names
disappeared after being filed.
In his decision. after relating the
facts in the case, as claimed and de-
MED. Judge Perry says:
The only person who attempts to
state the contents of the alleged lost
sections is Mrs. Coston. Her testi-
mony is quite vague and uncertain,
and is simply to the effect that the
columns of names. residence ad-
dresses and dates were filled up. She
had no interest in this matter except
a pecuniary interest, and she did not
look at any OF the sections, | am sat
isfied, for any other purpose than to
find whether they would pass muster
when they were presented to the Sec
retary of state. That she did not ex-
anime these papers carefully, or 9TH
| erwise than specifically, is apparent
from the fact that this court, upon
a mere inspection of the original pc
tition, found something like seven
teen hundred Illegal names. If Mrs.
Coston had made any sort of an ex-
animation for any purpose other than
| for the purpose of having the petit
| ton pass muster with the secretary
of state, she would have found the
names that this court found. | say
she did not make any examination
practically at all, and that her evil
dence cannot be considered by the
| court.
In order to prove the contents of
| the missingf- the REALTORS
should have called into this court
all of the circulators having charge
of these lost petitions, and 1t should
have appeared from the testimony
Of these elrculators, that each alleged
| lost petition contained a certain num-
Der OF names or persons VINO were
known to the circulator to be quail
fled electors. that each of these petit
ions contained the residence ad-
dresses of the signers; and that each
of those petitions contained the date
on which it was signed. This was
not done, and it was not explained
why it was not done. This court has
a right to assume and believe, and
does assume and believe that if those
circalators were called in they would
not have testified to that effect.
There is no proof that the alleged
sections were lost or destroyed, moth
ing but vauge lnsinuations that the
secretary of state, or someone in his
office, or some one interested in the
'reation of the new county may pos
,ibly have extracted and destroyed
sections 1871 to $50. The seal is un-
broken; there is nothing to show that
the petition was tempered with, and
the evidence is clear that it was not
tampered with.
Il find generally the issue herein
!oined for the respondent.
81 find specially (1D that the re-
ators have not proven by prepon-
lerance of the evidence, Or by con-