Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1917-11-23

don't uel.evr that YOUR sense of FAIRNESS
and right wi1l take away that right which
lis guaranteed m the constitution
M. crockett's Argument
Please Your Excellence:
The evidence has been somewhat
lengthy and sometimes tedious and |
regret taking further time in calling
attention to facts ana principal law
applicable to this case.
This II most important case-and
il establishes a precedent in this state
and perhaps in sister states. Is first
time referendum petitions ever investt-
gated and sifted. Been taken at face
and if apparently had 10000 names Or
more were accepted and matter re-
ferred 10 voters This time petitions
showed such gross irregularities and
fraud Your Excellency wisely decided
to investigate.
Our supreme court has by unani-
nous decisions in two Instances laid
down clear absolute rules for interpre-
tation Of this Constitutional provision
and counting Of names on petitions.
II rules are wrong IS fault Of judges.
Ii Constitution is al fault, is fault o.
people who voted into Constitution. SO
these rules must be strictly followed,
This investigation has been made.
I've rendered such assistance as could.
Not my province to ask You 10 throw
out but to investigate and present
facts.
There were in all about 1920
names. If 10000 he counted then
these petitions should he accepted and
Your ExcelIency place the matter be-
fore people. If only 1898 names. YOU
should reject and proclaim the laws
enacted BY the Legislature 70 be in
force.
Something said Of the. rights OF the
10000, but nothing Of the other 190.-
900 voters in Maine who have right
10 have the enacted laws put in force.
About 100000 voters in state. and if
their senators and representatives en-
act law. they have right to see it
made effective. Your Excellency has
no discretion but must follow the rules
as laid down by the Constitution.
Mr.. Crockett then briefly reviewed m
various petitions which have been the
subject OF question and discussion, among
them those Of Arthur n. BLUM Of Al
burn ana ". W. Farrar the rerifers
having signed other petitions; Alphonse
Dautelil verifying but no; signing; the
same in Augusta. OF J. 3. McDuf Of
Bruins wick. after having signed another
petition; Alpnose Higgins Of Calais.
which the court said couldn't he count
ed two from Camden petition not ver-
fed; Gardiner petition verified By A J.
Dauteuil but did not sign one from
Gardiner verified by T J. Devine. but he
had signed another one from Hallowoli.
A. C. Shorey verified But didn't sign.
One from Jonesport. with - names yer
fled June BIT r. NJ Woodward who
circulated but did not verify. Town cIork
certifes to IS and on stand said that
when Il LETT his hand. il had ~ names
and no more ard other % names were
afterward added. Tonesport has several
others. verified nv woodward, who cir
culated but signed none. All invalid
No matter il Your Excel1encv was
DESTROYS this bill he submitted to REQ
pie. YOU wouldn't have right. because
they were not signed. verified and Ger
tilted as provided rs the laws 81 this
State.
Lewiston petitions were then reviewed.
showing their various faults and reasons
why they should not be counted.
! don't pretend TO SAL where is all
this fraud. who is the guilty party. but
the signature in case Of Cyrille Giroux
is false and the jurat Of Charles r.
Lemaire is false.
The largest petition from Lewiston. ri
names. verified nv Paul LebarSe. Is not
RAUL but there is a Louis Paul Lebarge.
He said he signed none Of the petitions.
Somebody forged il and was case Of
gross and viful fraud and jurat ot
Charles T. Lemaire is false, | don't
care If ii docs disfranchise prominent
people. It is the fault OF the people
Other frauds and forgeries were
pointed out in order with the falsity
Of the accompanying jurats Of charles
r. Lemaire.
Similar cases in petitions from other
places were reviews, one from rum
ford having a typcwrittcn Justices sig
nature Numerous verifying petition
ers did not sign the petition. They
: were circulators only and court has all
ready ruled them Illegal.
We now reach cases contested for
fraud in notification Pierre Ducettc
signed and never saw il again till here
and did not sign, nor verify. His name
, was there. but he says he didn't write
it. It is said to be fac smile True.
a clever forgery by someone. but not
clever enough to escape detection
Someone forged il and the jurat Of
Charles +. Lemaire is false.
| regret that Bro. Morey has been
.disfranchised by the act Of Eugene Le-
! brund. He said he would have law on
the clerk, if at fault, but how in Heay-
4 ems name is clerk al fault? He must
! certify if name of voter is on petition
and he did but his duty. Eugene Lee
! hIuns name was there, but he had be-
lore signed, and he had no right to
Tsfsh this and if any man has disfran-
J chised Bro. Morcy. ii is Eugene Ie-
brun his man Charles