Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1914-12-19

Counted for Crosby, OF the
disputed, $50
5s25
Libby's plurality, 161
Total, 1887
Tt is therefore ordered, adjudged
and decreed that the petition of said
Howard B. Crosby be dismissed, with
costs.
A. NJ. SPEAR,
Justice S. J. Court
In behalf of the petitioner Mr.. Pat
tangall briefly outlined the history of
the case and explained It's present ap-
pearance in the form of a petition of
Howard B. Crosby, "a candidate for
county commissioner asserting that
corrections in the counting of the bal
lots will make him elected over Nor
! rison Libby.
Mr.. Pattangall explained that the
late Arthur w. Leonard, who had been
the candidate elected for this office,
had died on the Sunday preceding the
election, in consequence of which
stickers had been printed and placed
upon the ballots, according to law.
naming Morrison Libby as candidate
for this office.
The contention of the petitioner is
that the 1876 ballots counted under the
second ruling of Justice Spear, where
| by ballot is good though the sticker
| completely covered the name of the
Office to be filled providing such name
could be clearly read through the
test5 n IDaI to, IF
| this contention and others which
were asserted not to be in accord with
the rulings which had been followed
/ in the counting of the ballots were
exhibited to the court.
Mr.. Pattangall contended that the
votes should have been counted under
! the rules laid down in the cases of
| Pease VS.. Ballou and Bartlett vs.. Me-
| Intire which rules remain practically
unchanged under the statute of 1911
| and the application of which to the
| present case would, he declared, give
Mr.. Crosby the election by a plurality
of 80
Mr.. Pattangall argued strongly
against the second rule which had
been followed in the counting Of the
ballots, saying that such a ruling rem
dered voter dependent upon two
/ things: the thickness of the sticker
and his eyesight and maintaining that
| ii was inconsistent with Rule 1, which
was absolutely useless if Rule vera
| observed. He further stated that ac-
cording to the rule which had made
a ballot void by the appearance of
| two names for the Office many should
not have been counted because of the
fact that in looking through the stick
er for the name of the office one must
! invariably read the name of the can
] didate which was thereby covered.
| And he said that by the law the val
| idity of ballot was as much depend
ent upon the legibility of the name OF
| the office as that of the candidate.
Further argument quoted the law
| which makes the sticker when it Is
| affixed to the ballot a part of the bal
lot, and must have such consideration.
1t is wrong, Mr.. Pattangall stated, for
a large number Of voters to be dis
franchised by the mistake of an Of
fetal, but it is just as wrong thai
one voter be thus DISTINGUISHED
IT is true that such is possible. 1t is
also true that the voter becomes a
participant in the error which causes
his own Acknowledgement, insofar as
he is allowed three ballots if neces
sary and is allowed to return one thai
is not correct He may fail to do this
through neglect to read the ballot
carefully or through ignorance OF Its
| proper form which things are not
the speaker asserted, directly concern
ed with the present consideration OF
the counting of the ballots.
Mr. PattangaIl said that the petit
\ toner contended for but one thing
that the ballots should be counted &C
cording to the rules laid down in thf
Pease VS.. Ballou and Bartlett VS.. NC
Intire cases. The one break in the an
alogy of these cases with the present
one he stated to be the fact that IL
both the former instances the stickers
had been applied by the voters them
selves while in the present case the,
had been applied to the ballots ps
the ballot clerks under the directlof
of the secretary of State. CONCERNING
the consequence of this point th'
speaker made few remarks.
Il In closing his argument, Mr. Fat
tangall referred to the hberality o
the court to give effect to the lnten
ton of the voter, where such inten
tion is obvious But such intention
must be obvious, he stated, pecaus'
1 ballots should be counted as they arr
and not in accordance with an opln'
ion as to what the voter intended.
Frank L. Dutton began the case II
| behalf of Mr.. Libby by raising an op'
lection to the irregularity OF the ap
peal which had been filed for the pc
titioner. Mr. Pattangall interrupted :
admit this to be so and to explain
| that the decree upon which the ap'