Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1919-02-13
The 18th LEGISLATURE
Continued from Page g.

titled 10 the offices claimed by them.
and the entry in each case must be.
Petition dismissed, with costs.
Now if anybody. either lawyer or
a layman in this Senate. can procure
anything to the Senate by which they
should more conscientiously go than the
matter which l have tust read, then 4
would be interested to hear their dis.
cussion
That practically concludes the dis.
cussion of the law SO far as Judge Nor
rill's opinion is concerned.
New briefly l want to take up 4 few
facts and to call the attention OF the
Senate to the peculiar characteristics
of this particular case.
1t has been submitted in evidence,
believe, and il ] am not right Brother
Thombs will correct me, that no per-
son in the world can tell for whom the
fraudulent ballot; were east Is that
correct, Bro -hombso
Mr.. THOMBS: 1t is
Mr.. DEERING: Il has been testified
to by ten different men. eight or ten
different men. that they could not tell
anything about it. And so we come
here with 60 fraudulent votes in there
and nobody knows whether these co
fraudulent votes We're for Henry l..
Irish or for Edward r. Parent. And
then if nobody knows-and there is no
evidence put before this particular cleo
ton committee to sustain that burden
OF proof that they must carry--theu /
say that the report of the committee
is made under a msconception of the
law and the facts.
Now 1 understand that the man who
had the most to do with this particu-
lar ward and was most concerned in
protecting his good name from any
smirch that might be put upon it on
account Of the illegal things done at
that ward, was 4 man named OConner
l understand NJ. O'Conner has been
indicted. Int that has no particular
bearing upon the case. The idea was.
l believe. that he had been Republi-
can. 'He was Republican at that
particular time. Further evidence
showed that both parties asked him TO
take charge as warden. and further
w iusii,t SiioWtu tidt bd(h Il lew years
ago he was a Democrat. That is. this
man O'Conner has been on several
sides. Now supposing any partisan in
tereste! in TIE corruption of TIE ballot
wished. to have it done. what would he
do? Would he go to Democratic
warden or a Republican warden No,
not necessarily lie was go to that
kind of a warden that he. knew could
be fixed. And both parties knew Mar
tin O'Conner Republican party and
Democratic party are simply names
That is all in this particular case. They
have no significance in obtaining the
Justice that We want to obtain Now
l don't understand that Martin O'Con-
ner had anything 20 gain by the cleo
ton of Parent or by the election of
Irish II he didn't have anything to
gain by the election of either one Of
them somebody must have given him
something so as to make it for his
benefit to corrupt the vote. Now If he
did corrupt l., and nobody can deter
mine Cor whom the 395 honest ballots
were cast, are we going TO say that
those men shall be disfranchisel that
cast the 395 honest votes? One Of the
first cases decided by the Legislature
of the State of Maine. one Of the most
important I believe, was the case Of
Bradbury VS.. Usher, in Maine 1863, Part
;. and the legislative committee that
sat upon it was composed Of Lewis
Barker, II. c. Davis. Moses Lowell, NJ.
S. Staples. w. S. Peavey, II. L. Watts
and Reuben Merrill. don't know who
those men were, but 1 suppose that in
their times they were as diligent and
able as the men that are here now /
shall read little bit from their con-
illusions:
Reports of Massa chuset,s contested
elections in cases Western y. IA: Char
lemont. p. 9fl: Tyrirgham. cG6: Marble
head. @5 Ashland. 5S3; and Blanford
VS.. Gibbs. . Cush. 90 and in what NAV
he regarded as q leading case. settled
by the Massachusetts court in Sudbury
VS.. Stearns. q Pickering, las. In that
case 63 illegal votes We're cast at a par
ish meeting. and the court We're called
upon to pass upon the effect of these
votes upon the meeting. and they held
That the reception of the illegal votes
did not necessarily vitiate the proceed
in2s-that the moderator who admitted
them. if he acted corruptly, could be
punished. and so Of the men who threw
the votes. hut the meeting being legal
in its inception. the legal voters should
he protected in the exercise of Their
elective franchise We now quote the
language of the court: 1T is no obiec-
ton to an election that illegal votes
were received unless the illegal votes
changed the majority. The mere fact
of their existence never avoids an eiec
ton This is so plain a proposition that
it needs no authority to support it. 1t
is the principle adopted and acted upon
in all cases of contested elections.
whether in the British Parliament, the
Congress of the United States, the Leg.
islature OF this or Of any other Of the
United States. The burden of proof.
too, is always upon the persons con-
testing the election The committee
would further cite the case of Murphy
in 9TH Cowan, 153. in which it is laid
down that it must be made to appear
afiirmatively that the persons whose
election is contested received num-
Der of illegal votes which. if rejected.
would have reduced them to minority.
The mere circumstance that illegal
votes were received will not vitiate the
election. II this were otherwise. hardly
any election in the State could be sus-
tained,' Angel & Ames on Corp 72.'
That gentlemen. is one of the first
important cases in the State of Maine