Capital journal. (Salem, Or.) 1919-1980, 1922-07-31
REFUSE TO THROW OUT
Continued from Page one-)

AAMA gGE sg hAHh0a
Continued from Page One.)
lently influence their votes was
allowed with the stipulation that
the burden of proof OF such fraud
ulent practice rested with the con
testant and that fraud by voters
or priests must be handled as in
diyidual cases and proved indi
|vidually, Judge Bingham remark
ing that he dfdsnot see how sucf
charges could be proven.
Can Change Registration.
The court reiterated it's opinion
that voter may cnange his or ne
registration at the polls and aud
ed that it rest with the contestan
to prove that such changes Of reg
istration as are contested wer
changed with fraudulent intent.
Declaring that 1t could find n
precedents to guide it but classinl
the right of franchise as inheren
! TO American citizens the cour
held that the vote of entire pre-
cincts could not be thrown on
even if it was proved that the ma
jority of the votes cast in tina
precinct were fraudulent. In Veit
ing the opinion Judge Binghal
poined out that voter can be dill
franchised only by his own act
| that no fraudulent act Of anothe
individual can deprive him of hi
right to vote. To throw out tn
vote Of any precinct because /
the fraudulent voting of one c
more individuals would be to dt
prive legal voters Of the franchis
the court declared.
Must Prove Each Instance.
Answering question put
Attorney U'Ren, for the eontes
ant, Judge Kelly replied that IL
decision of the court precluded I'll
contestant from moving to thro
out any entire precinct exceI
where it was proven that each il
diyidual vote cast in that precint
was fraudulent.
Just before the noon recess O
colts attorneys filed two motion
:. purporting to amend the confess
ants complaint to conform wit
the decisions of the court on tn
points already passed, They move
that those sections of the con
plant asking that the vote Of er
I tire precincts where fraud wa
lpracticed and attacking the righ
of voters to change their registra
tion at the polls be stricken out.
! The second motion seeks to hay
the court order the contestant t
cite the names OF the individual
whose votes are alleged to hav
ben influenced, who SO unduly IL
| fIuenced them and where, whe
land how the influence was exe1
cised.
Subject to Change.
AS yet the method of procedur
in the contest proceedings ~
vague and subject to change a
any time. This morning it locke
as though the Marion county re
count might be finished by th
end of the week, but the decisio
Of the court that it would aIloN
| the admission of amendments u
to the time the action enters uI
on actual trial opens the way 70
an extended legal battle whie
may bring deluge Of motions an
counter motions.
Everything is in readiness 70
the work of recounting the ballot
in the SO contested precincts Q
Marion county but there is no wa
of determining when the coun
viii begin. It is not thought Ike
lly that OIcott's attorneys WI
bring any objections to a recoun
Of the ballots. but It is know
they are prepared to combat ii
contestants attempts to prove 81
dividual votes fraudulent.
Board to Make Recount. ~
The court this morning an
nounced the namesl of the boar
which will make the recount 2
follows:
J.E. Barr, for Governor Olcott
o. X. Dewitt, for Mr.. Hall, an
Grant Boyer for the court.
One intImation Of the course t
be pursued BY the defense was giE
en- this morning when Roy Shield
attorney for Oicott, in asking PEI
mission to file an amended ar
swer, stated that It was probabl
that the defense would wish th
opportunity to bring eounte
charges Of fraud on the part {
Ku Klux Klsn officials IN infly
eneing republican voters to cas-
their ballots for Charles Hall.
T. r. Barnes and Prof. W. z