CHARTER ELECTION VOTE CANVASSED

Cortland Evening Standard, Thursday, March 12, 1896.

THE VOTE CANVASSED.

SOME TROUBLESOME QUESTIONS RAISED.

Board Passed Upon the Returns as Presented—Several Mistakes of a Clerical Nature.

   When the STANDARD went to press yesterday the work of the board of village trustees as a board of canvassers of the vote of the charter election of the previous day had hardly begun. Some troublesome questions were raised at the very outset and the discussion of these occupied so much time that it was nearly 7 o'clock—a period of five hours—before the work was accomplished which is usually easily covered in an hour and a half.

   As was stated yesterday, the question was raised at the outset in an informal way as to the legality of the returns in the Third ward, as it was charged that the poll clerks had neglected in many cases to record the residence of the voter. The vote of the Third ward was very large, exceeding that of the Second ward, which had not occurred before, and it was charged that the poll clerks had been remiss in their duty as prescribed by the amended ballot law of 1895, and it was also feared that many of the votes were illegal.

   John Courtney, Jr. [D.], contended that the duty of the board of canvassers was purely ministerial and clerical and that it could not pass upon the legality of any votes cast. That was a privilege and duty reserved for the courts alone. The board of canvassers could only certify to the returns as placed before them by the inspectors from the several wards. He quoted decisions of the court of appeals to support his position.

   E. C. Alger stated that he appeared before the board as the representative of

Prof. D. L. Bardwell [R.], the secretary of the committee of citizens who were behind the independent movement, and he desired to present to and file with the board the following formal protest of the election:

   To the Village Board of Trustees and Board of Canvassers of the Village of Cortland:

   GENTLEMEN—You will please take notice that the undersigned hereby objects to your canvassing the vote cast at the Cortland village election March 10, 1896, and to declaring any result with reference thereto on the grounds that said election was fraudulent and void for the following reasons, among others:

   First, that in the Third ward of said village non-inhabitants of said ward were permitted to and actually did vote therein and that the number of illegal votes so cast as aforesaid will change the apparent result of the election of police justice, and also of other officers which were voted for at said election.

   Second, that certain persons knowingly voted at said election in the First, Second, Third and Fourth wards of said village when not qualified.

   Third, that certain persons knowingly and unlawfully voted at said village election in the First, Second, Third and Fourth wards more than once and also voted in said election districts or places where they did not reside and wherein they were not entitled to vote.

   Fourth, that various persons at said election within the polling places of said wards and in public streets or rooms within one hundred and fifty feet of said polling places electionerred and solicited votes in violation of the statute in such cases made and provided.

   Fifth, that various persons at said election in said ward marked upon their ballots and did other acts in connection with their ballots with the intent that the same might be identified as the ones voted by them.

   Sixth, That the inspectors in said wards at said election failed to comply with the law in returning official ballots as provided by law and also failed improperly returning ballots which had been marked for identification which were illegal and also in counting certain ballots as straight Democratic and as straight independent Republican and in favor of the respective candidates on said ballots when the same were illegal and should not have been so counted and that the number of ballots so counted, in favor of said candidates on the Democratic ticket and on the independent Republican ticket were more than enough to change the result of said election and to have elected several candidates on the Republican ticket at said election in each of said wards.

   Seventh, that the Republican candidates on said ticket in each of said wards actually received a larger number of votes than did the Democratic candidates respectively opposed thereto and especially on the ground that the Republican candidate for police justice, Charles S. Bull, was legally elected and actually received more legal ballots than did his opponent the Democratic nominee, Enos E. Mellon.

   Eighth, on the ground that said boards of inspectors and persons assuming to act at said election in said wards illegally destroyed and burned ballots or a portion of the ballots which had been cast at said election as aforesaid, and failed to return all of said ballots and preserve the same as provided by law.

   Ninth, that various persons not residents of said wards illegally voted therein for the candidates on the Democratic and Independent Republican ticket and in sufficient number to change the result and legally elect the Republicans respectively opposed to and running against said Democratic and independent Republican nominations, and also that divers persons voted more than once for said Democratic and independent Republican candidates in said wards at said election and to a sufficient number to charge the result and to legally elect the several Republican candidates on said ticket.

   Tenth, that said election boards and inspectors of election and other persons assuming to act at said election failed to legally discharge their duty in that they did not make a correct count of the votes cast and in that they did not make a correct return thereof and that the same is illegal and void, and that on all of the grounds aforesaid said village charter election is illegal and that a new election should be had.

   Eleventh, that said boards of inspectors in said wards and other persons in authority did not take and record the place of residence of the voters which voted on said occasion.

   Twelfth, that ballots cast at said election as aforesaid were marked so that said marked ballots could be distinguished and identified from others and that such ballots were illegally received and counted in behalf of said Democratic and independent nominees.

   Thirteenth, that voters were unduly and illegally influenced and intimidated in casting their said votes at said election to the prejudice of the said candidates on the said Republican ticket and in favor of the candidates on said Democratic and Independent Republican tickets.

   Dated at Cortland, N. Y., March 11, 1896.

   Mr. Courtney objected to the filing of this protest, as it was a matter over which the village board had no jurisdiction, they could not even consider it.

He objected to it also because it was signed by no one, it was to all intents and purposes an anonymous communication. It said "the undersigned" and there was no "undersigned."

   President Higgins asked Mr. Courtney to reduce his objections to writing as the work of this board of canvassers would soon be completed and they would be out of office and a verbal objection would have no bearing or standing with future boards who would know nothing of it. Mr. Courtney sat down at a desk and in a few minutes submitted and filed the following:

   The protest or anonymous communication filed or attempted to be filled by Mr. E. C. Alger this day to the canvassing of the votes in the Third ward of Cortland village, N. Y. , the undersigned has and now objects to its being received or filed by this board of canvassers for any purpose whatever, and insists that the same, not having been signed by anybody, should be treated by this board, if treated at all, as of no force or account whatever and in fact should not and cannot be considered filed or received for any purpose whatever by this board.

   (Signed) JOHN COURTNEY, JR., March 11, 1896.

   Judge Knox and Attorney I. H. Palmer were both summoned before the board and the case was stated to them and they both agreed with Mr. Courtney that there was nothing for the board to do but to go on and canvass the returns as they were before them and not attempt to pass upon questions which belonged to the courts, if to any one.

   The board then proceeded to canvass the vote in full which is given in another column.

   As they were about completing their task they looked over the sample ballots which were returned in the several wards showing the different ways of marking and they came upon a very singular vote and certification. In the

Third ward 171 votes were found certified to by the inspectors as being double marked. The names of the candidates in the Democratic ticket and those in the independent Republican ticket are just alike except that there are two candidates for inspector of election in the Democratic column and none in the independent Republican column. The inspectors of election had pasted into the returns one ballot and certified to the fact upon the back of the ballot that there were in all 171 ballots just like it where a cross was placed at the left of every name in both those columns, thus double marking the name of every candidate except those of inspectors of election whose names appeared only in the Democratic column. It was the opinion of nearly all the board that this double marking of the ballots invalidated the whole 171 votes, if they were all like that one, and that the inspectors should not have counted those at all. Some of the board declared that it could not be possible that 171 people could be found in a ward who would to misinterpret the law and the method of voting as to check names in two columns under two separate party headings—even though the names be the same—and they believed that the inspectors must have been in error in recording the fact that there were 171 of these ballots. They were at first inclined to send the returns back to the inspectors for correction, but then it appeared that the returns were not manifestly wrong in any particular and that in arriving at a decision to send them back they were making use of judgment and of something outside of their powers as a board of canvassers and were taking upon themselves the power of the court, for upon the face of the returns there were no manifest errors, and they decided that they must let them stand as they are, as far as they concerned.

   Judge Knox and Attorney Palmer were called back before the board and the stated and they said that the board had decided wisely to accept those votes as reported by the inspectors as they had no authority whatever to do anything else. They said, however, that the action of the canvassers in certifying to the returns of the inspectors in no way interfered with the question of a protest which might be raised in the courts if any one thought there was sufficient ground for making such a point. The board then signed the canvass and certified to it, and adjourned a little after 7 o'clock.

   And now comes the explanation of the peculiarity in the returns. To a

STANDARD representative who was present during the discussion of the question it seemed unlikely that 171 ballots could have been cast, all of which should have been marked in such an unusual way, and he started out this morning on a tour of investigation. The law requires that duplicate returns shall be filed with the village clerk and the county clerk. The STANDARD man called at the county clerk's office to see if the returns from the Third ward as filed there were just like those filed with the village clerk and found that they were not. The sample ballot which was pasted in at the back of the returns filed at the county clerk's office and which bore the endorsement that 171 such ballots were cast was a straight Democratic vote properly marked with a cross in the circle at the head of the ticket and bearing no other mark whatever. It was a ballot legal in every sense of the word.

   The reporter called upon Theodore Stevenson, one of the three inspectors in this ward, and inquired if he remembered about the ballot which was found double marked in the returns filed with the village clerk, and why it was that the ballots in the returns filed with the county clerk and the village clerk did not agree. Mr. Stevenson could not answer the latter question and said that he had had nothing to do with the pasting of the ballots in the returns filed with the village clerk, He had prepared the returns which were filed with the county clerk, but he remembered that there had been 171 straight Democratic tickets, 111 straight Republican tickets, eight straight Prohibition votes and the rest were split. He remembered seeing one such ticket as was filed in the returns at the village clerk's office, but did not know what became of it. He was sure, however, that there were not 171 of them.

   An unsuccessful effort was then made to find Mr. Newton Cone, a second of the inspectors. The STANDARD man found Mr. F. W. Kingsbury, the third inspector, and he remembered all about the circumstance and gave a full explanation of it, showing it to be purely and simply a clerical error. Mr. Kingsbury said that there were 111 straight Republican votes, 171 straight Democratic votes and eight straight Prohibition votes. These were rolled up in three separate packages and endorsed on the outside for convenience in continuing the count. There was also one single vote which was double marked and all the rest of the votes were split. When this double marked vote appeared there was a discussion as to what should be done with it. Some thought it should be thrown out, others thought it should be counted. The law was looked over. A clause was found in which the inspectors were charged that the votes should be counted if the intent of the voter was perfectly plain. In this case the intent of the voter seemed very plain as the names were the same in both the Democratic and independent Republican columns which were checked and it was decided to count it as straight Democratic. Mr. Kingsbury put it in the package of Democratic votes and in the remainder of the count the package was counted at 171 Democratic votes.

   When they got ready to prepare the returns for certification and filing it was nearly 2 o'clock in the morning. Every one was very tired and Mr. Kingsbury had been suffering all the afternoon and evening with a violent sick headache and he acknowledges that probably on this account he was not quite as watchful as he would have been earlier in the day. He took two votes from each package and handed one to Mr. Stevenson and one to Mr. Cone to paste upon the returns and endorse. Unfortunately the one passed to Mr. Cone was this particular vote over which the question had been raised, though he didn't know it at the time. And this vote was the cause of the lengthy discussion among the board of canvassers yesterday.

   It is fortunate indeed that a decision of the court has been obtained on just such cases as this and the decision is that where a discrepancy arises between the figures on the one hand in the body of the returns (where the particular vote is named for each candidate for each office) and the figures on the other hand set down for each kind of vote cast, the figures placed in the body of the return shall stand. It is fortunate because it settles this particular case in the Third ward, and also because it settles discrepancies in the Second and First wards. In the Second ward the vote on president as recorded in the body of the returns accounts for 650 votes. At the end of the returns, where the different kind of ballots are returned, only 286 ballots are accounted for. Exactly the opposite result is shown in the First ward where many more votes are accounted for as samples of ballots that appear as cast for each candidate. All of these things of course are clerical errors pure and simple, but none of them affect the result, for the figures in the body of the returns stand.

HE LIKES TO COAST.

Frank Sears Has a Mule That is Full of Tricks.

   A recent number of The Trotter and Pacer contains a communication from

Mr. W. E. Powers of Cortland, which will interest Cortland county readers. The mule referred to belonged to Mr. Frank Sears and he is ready to cut up all the capers mentioned in the communication, which is as follows:

   While I was being shown the stock of horses and cattle belonging to one of my friends, a farmer who lives a short distance from town, he called my attention to a well-kept, sleek-coated two-year-old mule that he seemed very anxious to have me fully appreciate, telling me how remarkably intelligent the animal was; also saying he was as playful as a dog.

   I was not loth to admit the truthfulness of this last statement, for they have a record to that effect. But I should have mentioned an appropriate proverb of Josh Billings, "Give every devil his due, but be careful there ain't much due him."

   "Denver," as he had been named, was then turned loose in the basement of the barn where he was stabled. Instantly he ran to a broad flight of stairs that reached to the floor above. It was made in such a manner that horses could be led up and down the incline. Also the fodder used in feeding the stock was thrown down this passageway, quite an amount of chaff and dust having accumulated thereon. "Denver" without hesitation made a break for the landing above. As soon as it was reached he commenced pawing the chaff causing it to fly in every direction. Then lying down he deliberately rolled over in a way that would carry him down the incline: and sure enough down he came, feet, back or head first; to him it seemed to make no difference apparently, not trying to save himself in his descent. Reaching the bottom of the stairs, be instantly mounted to the landing again and repeated the manoeuvre. Only once did he stop short of going the entire distance downward; and then, when about half way to the bottom, he recovered his footing, went again to the landing and made ready for the rough and tumble which followed.

BREVITIES.

   —The women's union prayer-meeting for the Armenian sufferers will occur at the parlors of the First M. E. church to-morrow afternoon at 3 o'clock.

   —About eighty were in attendance at the Congregational Y. P. S. C. E. social at Mr. Almeron Loucks' on South Hill last night. A fine time was enjoyed by all. Maple sugar was served.

   —A meeting is called at the Messenger House parlors at 7:30 o'clock on Tuesday evening, March 17, of those interested in organizing for a charity ball for the benefit of the Cortland hospital.

   —A large number of Cortland sports are going to Homer to-night to witness the boxing bouts. A leading feature will be the appearance of a former boxing instructor in the Syracuse Athletic association.

   —A regular meeting of the W. C. T. U. will be held Saturday, March 14, at 3 P. M. Consecration service conducted by Mrs. E. B. Nash. The program for the after meeting will consist of quarterly reports from superintendents of departments.

   —To-day is the eighth anniversary of "blizzard day," when the great storm swept over New York, causing great destruction to property and life and ultimately causing the death of Roscoe Conkling. Four years ago to-day another storm visited this state, and now it is hard at it again though in much milder form.

   —In view of the long continued snow storm, the daily and nightly meetings that have continued with increasing attendance and the coming of the missionary convention that is to be held next week in the First M. E. church requiring entertainment, the Epworth league gathering which should have occurred on Saturday night of this week will be omitted.

—Work upon remodeling the interior of the Burgess block is progressing rapidly. Town Clerk Alger is comfortably located in his new office in the southeast corner of the block. Pleasant offices for Justice of the Peace T. H. Dowd are being fitted up on the south side between that of Mr. Alger and Chadwick's barber shop. The stairs leading to Grand Army hall have been moved to the north opposite the front entrance of the block.

WIND AND SNOW.

Second Severe Blizzard of the Winter Sweeps the Empire State.

   NEW YORK, March 12.—Within one day of the eighth anniversary of the great blizzard a storm visited New York city and vicinity which was a powerful reminder of that incident in the history of New York. Snow fell in considerable quantities.

   Reports received from other sections of the state indicate that the storm has been quite general. Following are some of the reports received:

   Kingston—The blizzard began here with a strong northeast wind which developed into a violent gale. Business was practically suspended. The snow is drifting badly. Trains are delayed and ferries up the river are blocked.

   Newburg—The most severe storm since the blizzard of March 12, 1888, is raging. The gale is from the northeast and snow has been falling for hours. All trains are late. The country roads are blocked and the trolley cars have been stopped on account of snow drifts.

   The propeller Homer Ramsdell failed to start for New York on account of the storm, and her companion boat, Newburg, will not come up for similar reasons. The storm is still more severe up the river.

   ROCHESTER, March 12.—Snow, accompanied by a high northwesterly wind, began falling here, and the storm has turned into a blizzard. The fall of snow, although not over eight inches, is drifting badly, and all trains are reported as losing time.

   AUBURN, N. Y., March 12.—A terrific snowstorm set in here and at a late hour it is still snowing hard. A wind from the northeast is drifting the snow badly and streetcar traffic has been seriously impeded.