Show I 1 THE I 1 BOARD D CIDE to T GO to 0 o the ballot bov box for irregularities lari ties allem S USI BE 11 COURT bit elder is counted uw holy a tr r tad and lawyer flared a case of r other notts 4 correspondent ont from oar our regular SALT lare CITY aug 23 the utah commission yesterday appointed 8 L gillespie Gillesp le county registrar of box elder county in place of J K fowler alere Hereisa 1 capy of an order issued by the utah commission yesterday ordered that the presiding judges respectively of the elections held on the ath day of august dinst in t the he several precincts in silt salt lake like county utah do retain the ballot boxes with the ballots therein until further ordered by the commission or other competent authority the case of nathan hanson IIa naon under examination on a charge of un unlawful lawful cohabit a kioa continued from thurs caylat day last lat came up before commis ion er greenman Gree oman yesterday and incidental 0 it was one of the most singular ar ca of contempt of court on record A aay witness give gave a strictly and literally truthful answer to a question swore the elle could nive give no other ano answer ver a adget was adjudge adjudged in contempt cornot for not answering and wai ordered into confinement all because neither the court nor the prosecution could understand her maani meaning ot aal and abo she was unable to make them comprehend her the particulars will ap pear in the course of the fil allowing lowing account of the proceedings george bulwin I 1 a of north point testified witness lived eight or nine rods roja from defendant knew margaret hansen she has lived in a house houge about a quarter of a mile from defend ant had bad not been seen her since last winter never spoke to the defendant till tejay to lay about margaret hansen she had no baby when witness visited her ber last winter that witness saw wm win langford testified I 1 live at horth north point nearly two miles from defendant ave bae known margeret ilaleen many years list sw saw her three or four months ago at her own home eho she has three children the youngest might be five years old con could adnot not state its age definitely visited her as a church teacher mr critchlow Is the defendant a member of the mormon ch arch I 1 mr moyle moyled 1 object objection overruled witness I 1 believe he Is a I 1 think be he is counselor to the bishop have no idea where margaret hansen I 1 is it was in the winter or early in the spring when I 1 last saw her emma hansen daughter of the defendant testified margeret F hansen hanson ansen anson baa has three children the youngest Is in eight years old they were all at our oar house this morning I 1 have not een been margeret hansen since I 1 testified the other dy day there ii it a trail between our house boas and margeret hansens hansen went to her bouse house to look alter after things two or three weeks ago knew that she was not there it bad previously been shown that margaret hansen 1 I ft it her home about six six weeks ago and the prosecutor tried to get the witness to tell where she was and how she knew she was not at home when she elie witness wen t to care for her ll aluie houw uie bu did not BUG sao aeed to his satisfaction and the court re reprimanded p the witness mr air moyle in 6 ed that the witness had in an sherel every question cn mr critchlow Ont chlow what reason had you to suppose that margaret Mi rgaret hansen was not at home when you went to her bouse house to care tor for it mr moyle raise raised different legal ob sections to this question buethe but the court in a determined manner eaid said the witness must answer it the witness bald said the tile reason why I 1 did not expect to 0 o find margeret at home when I 1 went to her tier house to look after etwas it was because when I 1 went to her house not there 11 over and over again this question I 1 was out dut how illow did vou you know margaret hinson was not at home when you went to her bouse house to care for it ita over and over again the witness r repeated e the same answer because when I 1 went to her bouse house I 1 did not find her at home mr critchlow in insisted doted that the witness was the court the latter reprimanded the witness repeatedly peat edly and threatened to punish tea her for contempt mr moyle endeavored to have her give a more satisfactory reason bit the witness eaid said she could not the one she bad had given waa was the tile true and only reason mr moyle insisted to the court that the witness had given the only answer she could give but the court ruled r that her answer was no anwer at all and that abbe he must give one mr critchlow then asked before V you 0 u went to 31 tr girata garets louse yott von did not expect to find her there now why did you not expect to find her bera at hems thoma Witness Because I 1 knew she was not there mr critchlow insisted that be the witness was contumacious and persistent in refusing to rive give an answer to bis his question mr moyle insisted that she had evidently answered anew e red as well as she could he e endeavored to have the witness give an answer which would satisfy the prosecutor but she add ehe she co could id give no other reason for not to find margaret hansen IIi insen at home than that the latter was not at borne home when witness went there the court held tt e witness in contempt and awl ordered her to be committed mita for twenty four he hour sor until ehe jahe should consent to answer mr moyle requested that the order recite the question and the witness answer thereto and her further d declaration eclar stion that she could eiveno give no other answer than the one she bad had given but the commissioner denied the mr moyle mayle very well I 1 presume pr osame we will be able to get the facts before the proper court elizabeth hansen another daughter testified and the case was ordered continued until 10 am a m monday the commissioner informed MIBS miss that she was in incus cas tody wy at kt mr moyles suggestion it was agreed that her reply to the question might be taken in writing whenever ebe be chose to toa answer to the of the court it was apparent that the vi witness bad had no motive farent lor or not answering the question satisfactorily factorial facto fact oril rily after court adjourned mr air I 1 moyle lid bad a brief conversation with the witness when all bedame perfectly I ily clear lear C her reply to mr critch low lows question had not been understood I 1 previous to her going to mar margaret aret Hat ivens house to care for it X he bad visited it and BO so bad Imir tied that margaret was not there her reply bad had reference terenca re to provi previous u s visits the she had made to margaret margaret bowse house but the pr prosecutor 0 and court understood it to b have ave reference only to her going to the louse house to take charge chariot of it she was leased released from custody ahe the territorial board of canvassers met again gaiu yesterday at the utah commission mission office alter after a brief private season the doors were thrown open oven and ad judge judd read an elaborate opinion on the questions that had been presented the official 01 the board on these points was th then e announced by chairman sells as fo follows 1 I 1 the return includes tally sheet and abstract 2 J 11 rumel Kumel jr is not J 11 II rumel and that 11 II page and henry page 1890 Is 19 the tho same person that where there are discrepancies it esthe is the duty 0 of f the canvassing board to examine the ballot box 3 that in the case of 0 galligher and toronto the discrepancy justifies an ila examination of the ballot box 4 the case from weber county from bingham precinct and south cottonwood the returns will govern 5 in the box elder case the returns from the judges last a appointed by tho the utah commission a aro to held field to be the legal returns 6 that no farther further arguments will be beard heard upon questions that hare have been discuE eed the vole vote on conclusions 1 2 and 3 wa was s three or two judge judd mr kiter riter and ju judge dge smith voting in the affirmative and col sells and mr air anderson in the negative on OR the remain remaining Dg three conclusions the vote waa was unanimous about an hour after the dec decision J judge U ige LoA loofborough borough made a for formal ision ai demand upon the board to count the returns aa as they are shown on the face in the first poll first precinct tor for I 1 J U H ramel and J H rumel jr and certify them for separate persona persons charman belli sells the board have decided not to do that judge loofborough Loot borough retired rr tired and ft it is understood that an attempt will be made to get an order of court corn coin the canvassers to count the vote as demanded the greater portion of judge joddis opinion is devoted to bowing showing when the tile board of canvassers are justified in going 0 to o the ballot boxes the next illy division I 1 sion is in iel le lation atlon to the distinction jr in the tile vote for mr kumel rumel which is held as one of the conditions under which a recount can ba be made then the box elder and weber county cases are treated upon in the following manner the next question in the regular order to which I 1 come is as to the question raised upon the returns from box elder precinct box bar elder county we have been to tod d that the utah commission appointed fed a letof judges who under such appointment proceeded to open and hold an election according to law and we have been told at the same lime time that after their a appointment and before they had bad performed the duties impo ed eil upon hem them adother set were appointed by the utah Commis commission for reasons satisfactory to ill the 0 commission and that they met and 0 opened and held an election a according ng to law in said precinct and here there has been forwarded to the commies missioner ioner and placed before this thin ward board two sets of of returns I 1 from tom box elder eller precinct both of 0 which so far as all they appear upon their face are perfectly fee y regular of c course ourse this board sitting ai fl a board of canvassers are necessarily compelled in each and every instance as a primal question to settle what VV hat are the returns that they are called upon n to canvass in the very nature uro of t things the power to decide upon the val city and legality of the returns urna BO so fr far as 0 to o decide who were he j judges g e 9 of election who were th by law ti hold said election devolves upon this bond and thiede clelon in every instance must be made before any canvass can commence this hoard board sitting here under the authority of law is bound to 0 o take notice of the powers of the utah commission to appoint the oil i cors core of election for it is one specially conferred by act of congress they are like likewise wise bound to take noice notice of the officers so appointed by the commission Comtois Bion it can hardly te be disputed that the power to appoint where nothing to the contrary is bald sala in n the law conferring the power must necessarily carry with it the power to remove or appoint reappoint re or to appoint ot other bersand sand different persons iti h this case the utah commission sion have lave seen proper to exercise thi tha power vested in them to revoke an appointment ip and to mike make another appointment the other and lait last appointment male by them of election officers for box elder precinct were lucius A snow brigham Brix hana wright glit and allonzo 11 II snow these officers have certified to the utah commission a return of their conduct in in holding bolding the election as a judges of box elder precinct and the return has been placed before this canvass ing board and upon its face it may be said it is to fair and legal without any ajay discrepancy or irregularity and in my opinion there is nothing left fir this board to do but to canvass that as a legal return from such precinct and to count the vote accordingly in I 1 ga N whether ahr the utah commission have correctly performed their duty dutt or whether the election in said precinct waa was irregularly held or whether persons voted who bad no rl right bt to vote are all q questions lations with which mch this board has naught to do and it only remains for us as in other cases to accept the tea a it certified here by the proper office officers rs and to count it accordingly it is argued that both of these returns are illegal and ought to be thrown out in the first place to accept such a as that would be in my opinion under the authorities which I 1 have consulted to entirely avoid the this election tee e t in it that county and leave the people without hav having ing accomplished any result by their election in august and the effect of this would be to put the county government in a state of deamoral demoralization a if if it t anarchy a result which by all means in every instance must be avoided d it it can be done by any legal int intendment end so far as the contest from weber county is concerned it is in substance that votes cast for one candidate were co counted tinted tor for another there is no complaint hero that the returns upon 1 their face are irregular or that there is any discrepancy therein but it la is alleged that the ballot box will allow that votes were cast for mr BIT hamer fir fr county recorder which were as a matter of fact counted for mr air tyler tor for the same office it may be a subject for regret that if tho the facts be aa as alleged this b baird oi d have not the power conferred upon on it by law to san send power for ha the ballot ug box X and recount tuch such votes but I 1 have conclusively shown that lano in no event can the they y send tor for the ballot bos box unless I 1 e there app appears ears u non the face ace of th the e returns such discrepancies or irregularities lari larit ties les as will prevent the 1 intelligible cari canham yass of of the returns and since it Is not alleged that a any ny irregularity or discrepancy appears upon the I 1 lace laos of the cretu returns roe the board simply a does ita its doty duty by canvassing the r returns a as made if the contention of sir mr hamer be true a great wrong lias has been done to him and the badges of election are I 1 little ittle less than cri criminals and fortunately for rood good order ani the well being of society our laws provide means thereby mr lamer cannot only have his wrong righted bat but guilty parties punished punie hed on motion of judge smith the board then took up the returns trona from box elder precinct BrIF brigham ham city and canvassed it according to the decision this made the result as follows in BOX ELDEB ELDER CoI collector lectOr jonah Alst mathiak bias 11 II standing aw selectman R 11 beatty ed E spencer tj 45 t scattering 7 be selectman betais john U D peters peers L 31 hopson scattering 1 assessor david 1 burt bart W 11 booth jr scattering 3 prosecuting attorney Ati orney nels nele jensen J 31 coombs scattering 2 coroner corone 0 if davidson 11 8 angell scattering 1 recorder john burrows A IV davia davis scattering 1 I sheriff C 0 loveland d W L murphy scattering 3 surveyor N P anderson jaa jas B murphy treasurer 0 0 0 snow L W pavey scattering 2 this vote elects the entire peoples ticket the other counties canvassed by the boari boar fare dare as follows PIUTE PIL TE COUNTY selectman 6 LT Hili manwell lwell 16 5 john 11 fulmer scattering 3 cauntay clerk 0 1 P barenton Baren Bare too atoa john morrell Assee assessor sor and collector R A alien allen al IV mansfield prosecuting attorney M W mansfield 0 al M manwell scattering 7 coroner 0 A brown rec recorder ardit W 11 II black scattering 1 sheriffs johnson charlea charles morrell 1021 surveyor Sarye Sarve T E king treasurer john morrill david W V stoker scattering 2 BICH RICH COUNTY selectman ira Tra eph mcminn 47 scattering scatter ine 1 canty clerk john M |