The Sauk Centre herald. (Sauk Centre, Stearns County, Minn.) 1886-current, 1927-05-19

Frank Cola, Katie Spychalla, Isaac
johnson, Bertha Minke, August
Minke, Mrs. Herman Knaak, Ella
Jenkins and Caroline Zellgert.
The twenty-four voters who
swore they voted for DeLaurie1
and whose testimony, therefore, de-
prived him of the votes, were the
following: Joseph Geror, John
Brenning, Mrs. Adolph Lietz, Mrs
VIM. Lunzer, MRS. Carl Schwanke
Jens Larson, Chas. Kircher, Mrs.
Annie Dinkel, Edwin Bartylla, Mrs
Pollock, Matte Christianson, Jo-
seph Ostrowski, Frances Hosalla
Mary Bartylla, Hattie Krybus, Ro'
salla Schenk, Sophie klselewsN
Leander Mace, Albert Zigan, Pau
Ulick. Matt Ulick, Simon Kargi
Mckinley jenkins and Sam Jen'
kins. l.
The Judge decided that due to
conflicting testimony the votes OF
the following persons were not &c
be considered in this particular
Frances John, Johanna Rosenow
Mrs Ellen Larson, Mrs. John
Froh. Mrs. f.. F. Schmidt, Mrs
Ed LAWN, Hattie LAWN, and Mrs
Lizzie Dinkel. ~
He also decided that the ballots
of the following voters would MOI
be considered in the decision foa
the reason that they did not know
ord II was not clear for whom they
voted: Mrs. August Minke, Johr
Scheve, and Chas. John.
The ballot of Calvin Dennlson
who said he had voted for MISS
Thorn, in Turtle Creek township
was thrown out as an illegal bal
lot for the reason that Mr.. Den
nison was not resident of thai
township when lie voted.
Mr.. DeLaurier's claim that 6
ballot marked for him had beer
thrown out in Burtrum precinct
was dismissed by the judge as mo-
proved. DeLaurier's claim wa!
that when the judges got ready tt
count the ballots they found there
was one more ballot in the boz
than there were voters registered
and that they had thrown out thu
last ballot cast in order to bring
about a balance and that the bal
lot thus thrown out had been mark
ed for him.
There were contentious tina
seven or eight ballots in Bruce
township bore pencil markings cal
culated to identify the ballots
Most of these were marked TO,
Miss Thorn. The judge decided
not to throw these ballots out fo1
the reason that the marks were no
identifying marks. While TIT
judges statement does not so state
it seemed to be agreed that thes'
markings were put there by TIT
judges and not by the voters.
After figuring UP and disposins
of the disputed ballots, throwing
out the eighteen illegal ballots tina;
had been cast for Miss Thorn anC
the twenty-four that had been cas-
for DeLaurier, the judge arrived a
the conclusion that Miss Thorn hat
received ALAG ballots and Mr..
DeLaurier 4,136 ballots, and HI
therefore ruled that Miss Thon
had been elected and was entitled
to the office.
The suit that had been brough'
by Miss Thorn to get the salary Of
the office during the past months
that she has been acting as super
intendent, arguments concerning
which We're heard by the judge al
the recent special court term, was
also decided by him on Tuesday
He ruled that Miss Thorn should
have the salary of the office from
and after January II, 1927, which
was the date when she assumed the
office. The decision does not state
who is to draw the salary from
January 1 to January II. Mr.. De-
Laurier held the office during these
seventeen days and in all probabil-
ity he is entitled to the salary for
that period.