Show THIRD PRECINCT CASES Hearing on the Petitions For Writs of Mandate X WILL DECIDE THIS MORNING PROHIBITION CASES VCIVY LIKELY TO BE DROPPED Is I he Duty of ihe VinU CO nub sioix to Recount All the Votes for Evcry Canditlivie ox Only the Vote for Those CundliUvtesi in which DtscrepixTLcIeH in the Poll LH < and the Tally Khixsta Appear Ap-pear At 10 oclock yesterday morning Judge Miner of counsel for the petitioners tioners In the applications of John Henry Smith and George R Emery vs the members of the Utah commission I for writs of mandate and writs of prohibition pro-hibition in the matter of issuing certificates cer-tificates of election for delegates to the constitutional convention from the Third precinct of Salt Lake city called the courts attention to the fact that I the hearing was set down for yesterday i yester-day None of the counsel for the defendants defend-ants being present a postponement was taken until 2 oclock at which hour the pe1ioner again presented them selves Judge Miner said he had notified noti-fied the defendants and their counsel that the case was expected to come up iind he expected they would be here Judge Bartch Do you Intend to take up both applications for writs of man damus and prohibition Judge Hiles In view of the ruling of the supreme court it is Intended to take up only the mandamus cases The will not than e hearing wn occupy more half an hour a we intend to present only the tally sheets in proof of the ground we take Chairman Letcher Judge Henderson and Mr Williams our counsel were unexpectedly called to Ogden and cannot can-not be present at this time and Judge Powers is in Judge Merntfs court Judge Powers at this cour stepped in and said he was in the middle of an important damage Suit in Judge Mer ritts court and that It was impossible for him to appear in these cases He had once tried the experiment of try ing two cases at the same time and got beaten before his honor and he didnt intend to try it again Judge Bartch The case might be heard this bear t2ls evening After some further talk it was agreed that the court would convene at 730 to hear the Cases and Judge Bartch admonished the parties Hti sant to be on hand promptly a the court had a great deal of work to do 3tn < IanvaH Cixucs Henril In the evening when court convened with Judge Bartch on the bench Judges Bennett Miner and Miles were present representing the petitioners Smith and Emery and Judges Powers and Henderson representing the Utah Commission Judge Hiles addressing the court said the only matter to be tried was the question of discrepancies and that both cases might be tried together on the petition for writs o mandate Judge Powers agreed to this and the petitioners put Commissioner E W Tatlock on the stand Judge Hileg put in evidence the tally sheets of polls 1 2 and 3 of the Third precinct of Salt Lakewlthout objection Commissioner Tntloctc Mr Tatlock testified in reply to Mr Riles that ne had examined the tally sheets and found the total vote for John Henry Smith was 693 He had examined the lists for the purpose of acertain1nb if there were any discrepancies discre-pancies affecting his election and found none The poll lists and the tally sheets in his case correspond te John Henry stood third highest on the list and Andrew Kimball fourth with a total of 692 votes Five candi adtes were voted for on each of the three tickets Democratic Republican and Populist There were a few scattering scat-tering votes Have you examined the list in respect re-spect to the candidacy of George R Emery asked Judge HUes I have replied the witness and find the conditions the same as in the case of John Henry Smith the poll lists and the tally sheets agree and show that he 707 got votes the highest of any candidate The returns showed John Henrv Smith 693 votes George R Emery 707 I E Booth 656 N Treweek 655 W L Dykes 589 The poll lists and tally sheets were the same in the above five candidates and therefore no discrepancies W B Preston 700 705 discrepancy 5 A Kimball 692 686 discrepancy 6 A H Raleigh 672 672 discrepancy 0 H A Smith 672 667 < mih C2 discrepancy B t A W laicCune 676 671 discrepancy 5 Crossexamined by Judge Powers witness said there were no discrepancies discrepan-cies regarding the election of John Henry mith and George ft Emery between be-tween the poll lists and the tally sheets There were discrepancies between be-tween the poll lists and tally sheets in regard to other candidates Judge Hiles I object to testimony in regard to the candidacy of other parties par-ties being admitted This proceeding is by John Henry Smith and George R Emery and has nothing to do with any other candidates The objectionwas overruled and the testimony admitted exception being entered by Judge HUes Jnilsre Powers Contention This wassail the testimony taken and the point at issue resolved itself Into whether or not it was the duty of the commissioners to recount all the votes for every candidate or only the votes for those candidates in which the discrepancies between the poll U t and the tally sheets tnly heet appeared Judge Powers on behalf of the com mision argued that when the commissioners commis-sioners went to the ballot boxes on discrepancies it was necessary to count for all the candidates in order to obtain a correct result Judge Bartch Do I understand you to hold that i discrepancies occur in votes for one office that i would be for the proper commission to recount ticket count the votes for every office on the Judge Powers No only for all the candidates running for the office in which the discrepancies occur the dicrepancs our j Judge Miles Arsmmcnt Judge Riles then made a very short argument holding that this preceding affected only those who were parties to the action and that the recounting of votes should Tie confined to those candidates in whose votes discrepancies discrepan-cies occurred and that it the cie occurre that was duty of the commissioners to issue certifi crates to those shown by the face of the returns t be elected I was unnecessary un-necessary for the court In this action to decide as to any other candidates for ihe benefit of the Utah commission than those party t the action J Will D ci < le ThIs Evening This closed the case and his honor said he would take I under advisement and deliver his decision this morning Okc Prohibition Cases Judge Miner then stated that he thought It was unnecessary to proceed with the prohibition cases at this time I and that It might not be necessary to try them at all I Judge Powers toughing Wa are ready to go ahead with the prohibition cases right now Judge Partch smiled and said he J would not hear the prohibition cases until after he had decided the mandate man-date cases anyway < Judge aiiner Well we can prove the writs of prohibition were necessary in these cases for the gentlemen or the Utah commission were about to recount re-count the votes when they were stopped by the writs of prohibition |