The Sauk Centre herald. (Sauk Centre, Stearns County, Minn.) 1886-current, 1927-05-19
MISS MARTHA THOM
HAS MAJORITY OF 10
Todd County Superintend-
ent Contest Decided by
Judge Parsons
WIDE SPREAD INTEREST
LADY Was Given Certificate
of Election-Mr. De Laur-
ier's Contest Filed
(Ionp Prairie Leader

Judge Parsons QeclQeQ ueSudy
that Miss Martha Thorn had been
elected Superintendent of Schools
by the voters of the county at the
election last November, by a ma
iority of ten votes.
This decision ends the contest
suit which has been under consld-
Grafton since last November as TO
who was elected county superln-
tendent ait the last election.
Judge Parsons decision, which
was filed Tuesday afternoon, is
quite lengthy and he takes up each
ballot that was in dispute, but in
particular discusses the illegal bal
lots that were case and ordered
thrown out.
1t will be recalled that the of
fetal count last November gave
the office to Miss Thorn by ma
jority of nineteen. On the re-
count the counters decided that
Miss Thorn had been elected by a
majority of five. Contest pro-
ceedings were then started by Mr..
DeLaurier and a hearing was held
in December, another one in Feb
ruary, another one at the regular
district court term in March, and
another one at a special court
term in April.
At these various court hearings
the principal points in contention
were ballots cast by voters who had
had the ballots marked for them
the voters themselves not previous
ly having taken an oath that they
were unable to mark their own
ballots. The law requires that al.
such ballots are illegal and should
be thrown out.
The situation developed the cir
cumstances that if such voter
voted for DeLaurier, for instance.
the ballot, being illegal, would be
thrown out and DeLaurier would
lose one ballot. The situation OPP
Grated the same way with similar
ballots cast for Miss Thorn.
1t appeared that a large num-
Der of such illegal ballots were
cast in the county. In practically
every precinct the election judges
ignored the law and permitted vot-
ers to have their ballots marked for
them without previously requiring
the voters to take the required
oath. Both Mr.. DeLaurier and
Miss Thorn summoned a large num-
Der of witnesses who were voters
who had had their ballots marked
for them without being sworn.
The situation was peculiar in
that if a voter testified that the
voted for either of the candidates
his testimony deprived that candi-
date of a vote. 1t is said that
there We're between two hundred
and three hundred such illegal
votes cast in the county at the
last election. Most of these were
subpoenaed by one or the other
of the contestants. However, not
all of the voters appeared and in
quite a good many cases the vot-
ers could not remember for whom
they voted. However, according
to Judge Parsons decision eigh-
teen such voters, who swore they
had voted for Miss Thorn, had their
ballots thrown out, and twenty
four such voters, who swore they
had voted for Mr.. DeLsmrier, had
their ballots thrown out. The vot-
ers who swore they had voted for
Miss Thorn and whose testimony,
therefore, deprived her of the
votes, were: James Bloxham, Her.
man Schwechel, Mrs. Herman
Schwechel, Mary Yorko, Julia Spy
chala, Lizzie Bauer, Katherine
Bauer, Susan Johnson, Mary
Brown, Emma Pommeraning,