The Wolf Point herald. (Wolf Point, Mont.) 1913-1940, 1922-12-14
Claim Illegal Voting In Is Out of
81 Precincts ---- Charges Absurd

In otaining a temporary restrain
ing order the Poplar for county seat
advocates have exposed their hand.
They did have temporary restrain
ing order issued out of Judge Corners
court on December 8, restraining the
county officials from moving the
county seat from Poplar to Wolf
Point before the Goth of December,
when hearing will be held in Poplar.
This order is in full force and effect
at the present time but means
nothing more than allowing time for
the attorneys to prepare their data
for the hearing on the goth.
1t is generally understood that the
allegations made in obtaining the in
junction will be used as grounds for
contest In event this comes to
pass, a few of the allegations are
worthy Of consideration.
The document is a lengthy affair
and contains many repetitions so only
the important parts will be of in
terest.
The plaintiff, Dr. j. L. Atkinson of
Poplar, complains that in Is out of
the 81 precincts of the county the
voting was illegal. The precincts
complained of are pretty well scat
tered over the county but in each
instance gave Wolf Point majority
at the Nov election Specific
mention is made of Waska, Dry Fork,
Volt and Bainville Nos 2. 3, and a,
and Froid precincts 9, 10 and IL,
Wolf Point precincts 81 23 "a and
rs, Dwyer and Mondak, alleging that
more than 180 votes were cast in
these precincts in favor of Poplar and
not counted, and that $50 votes were
counted for Wolf Point in these pre-
cincts that were not cast
1t is further alleged that 1875 votes
were cast for Wolf Point by persons
who were not qualified electors The
allegation then goes on to say that
the lat votes cast for Wolf Point in
precinct 81, (Old TOWN., are wholly
Illegal and void No mntion is made
of the five votes Poplar received in
this precinct, it being presumed that
they were all right from the Poplar
viewpoint. The objection to the votes
in this precinct is the same as was
presented to the canvassing board,
that the polling place was in an In
dian trading post. It is asked that
the votes in Volt precinct be not
counted on the grounds that the vot-
ing took place at the school house in
stead of at the postoffice.
When the writer of the complaint
came to define the things done in the
Wolf Point precincts he used all the
language in the diction-
ary. After naming three gentlemen
from Wolf Point and one from Balm
vile as conspiring to corrupt the local
election and saying that the judges
of election and the people in general
were included in the scheme, the
writer goes on to say that for the
above reasons the election was un-
fair, prejudiced, corrupt, unlawful,
illegal, fraudulant and void. If any
reader can think of anything else
that could possibly be the matter
with an election a reward should be
offered for the words to express their
thought.
In Bainville precinct 3, the same
old charge is made that the election
was not held at the place designated
and an awful howl about Wolf Points
literature is included for
good measure. For all of which it
IS claimed the Bainville votes were
illegally cast. and not entitled to be
At Volt it is alleged that more
han so voters were deprived of
heir franchise because they could |
lot find the school house or words of |
similar meaning.
One portion of this soon-to-be |
amous document tells of the county
,eing $992,501.99 in debt but fails
o tell how this sad condition of af-
airs came about No mention is
made of the state examiners report
md nothing is said of the business
Methods employed to place the coun-
y this far in the hole. Even the
'rinting contract escaped mention.
The admission is made that the
oard of canvassers did declare Wolf
'oint the permanent county seat of
roosevelt county but in the next
reath it says that the canvassing
oard was all wrong. This seems to
Indicate that the supreme court was
4 error also in compelling the board
count the votes in three precincts :
1hich they had rejected upon the adj {
ise of Attorney Erickson.