Daily Kennebec journal., 1917-12-28
Continued from Page onel

.. the Justices, / made an inyestiga-
inn of these petitions and the circum-
frances and facts surrounding then
.icning. verification, certification ano
ding and as the result thereof, in or
dor that all persons interested for or
aeainst the validity and sufficiency of
hose petitions and the referendum Of
his Set. might appear and be heard
called and held n public hearing,
Giving notice thereof, by publication in
The daily newspapers throughout the
state thirty days before the date upon
, which such hearing was to be held, to-
gether with a special notice to each
# the verifying petitioners and certi-
svjue clerks of the cities, towns and
carnations whose verificatiOn or certi-
ication, respectively, was questioned
Ir the matter Of this Act various err
ror, of omission and commission ap-
nearing upon the face of the petitions
themselves were called to my atten-
,,nn. witnesses under oath testified up
m the stand and numerous exhibits
insisting of questioned petitions and
standards Of handwriting were offered
and competent StenographerS made a
cecord of the proceedings, a copy of
,hirh is fled in the office of the Sec
relay of State with this finding by me
made
Having considered all Of the testi-
roliy presented at the public hearing
and having carefully examined and in
.pected The petitions and other exhib
- tilrG find the following to be the
fact- which appear to me to exist in
the matter Of these petitions addressed
to me asking for referendum of this
Act.
"Petitions were filed with the Secre
tar, Of r;tato within the Constitutional
period. bearing apparently signatures
aggrcgating 1920.
Tho formal decision by Governor
Mlliken is voluminous. In making it,
he quotes the questions submitted to
the Justices of the Supreme Judicial
Court AS to the validity and sutficiency
Of various petitions and also their an
swsrs.
Question II was: IN case a petit
ton is verified by the person who cir
,ulates the petition and who is not one
of the signerS of the petition himself.
should the same petition be accepted?'
The courts answer was: I'VE an
swer in the negative. A person can
not be verifying petitioner who rs
not himself a Signer of the petition
purporting to be verified"
Governor Milliken therefore con-
cludes that 10 petitions were Verl1ed
not hv Il signer >of the petition. but,
according to the endorsement, by per-
sons who circulated the petition. These
10 petitions bore 992 names which are,
therefore. not allowed by the Governor.
Question 3 was answered by the
Justices as follows: 1t takes more
than Il mere signature to constitute q
petitioner. The person, whose sigma
tule it is, must have the right to sign
and to have his name counted as one
of the ten thousand electors necessary
to suspend the operation of a statute.
|: must be the signature Of person
who has a right to act as petitioner
in that particular proceeding and on
that particular petition. n person mas
that right on the first petition. There
hi; right ceases. Suppose he signs
one hundred different petitions. his
name can be counted only on the hrst
petition. His name can be counted
cnlv on the first and he is petitioner
,rly when his name can be counted.
Tho other 80 signatures are utilities
and of no more efficacy than blank
spaces. His name appeared rightfully
an tho first petition and wrongfully on
all others.
"If a -countable signature does
not reprcsent constitutional petitloh-
or then il follows that such a person
cannot verify the petition. one muS'
he A legal petitioner before he can oe
a verifying petitioner. If the first 1alis
the last fails also.
In principle this question was oe-
,.ided on the former occasion. III was
there held that a person was lncohpt-
tent as n verifying petitioner altnousii
his name appeared upon the peutlon
verified, if 1t had been speclhcaiiy eN-
cepted by the clerks certificate as not
being upon the voting list.
ones 8. ia, Maine 571-2. The slsneH
.Wa., disuualified d in that case by the
clerks certificate, in the present case
ly his reduplication of signature III
neither was he competent to verify be-
rljyo in neither was he legal petl-
tlnIcr.
IN is the person to whom the nam,
h.lnn4s who makes the verifioatlon ana
i4Fcs the oath and that person can Neil-
+, only once because he can be a pel-
1.onor only once
Seven petitions under this ruiihg ave
Excluded by Governor Miihken. lheJ
aggrceatc 4i6 names.
Question 10 and its answers were NA'
tan the names on the petition oe
,ouutcd where the name of the FeiliH
inc petitioncr does not appear on any
acutlun?'
Answer. We answer in the mega
two"
'0.5 can a verifying petitioner VINO
failed to sign the petition by lnadNelt-
tncr but did sign as verifying petltioh-
~. and his vcrification was duly taken
Nv tlc magistrate, (both Nerlilfat'o"
and i,rat being according to the forms
If blanks hereto annexed) he regarded
as 4. petitioner as to entitle the names
of tho petitioners to be counted!
Answer. We answer in the mega
tive"
Because Of this opinion. noNer''o'
Millikcn dsallows three petiffons car
rylng i1S names.