MAINE. 



180 





should bo submitted to tho Supreme Court fur 

 adjudication. To this Governor Garoelou re- 

 l>lit:d on December 27th, saying: 



You intimate that it is in my power to restore peace, 

 tranquillity, and good feeling to the State and all its in- 

 huhitanu by asking the opinion of the Supreme Judges 

 on Moh law-point involved in the variations of the 

 count from the returns. Nothing would give me great- 

 er pleasure than an authoritative opinion upon the 

 points involved in the present condition of affaire, and 

 also upon such as might bo likely to arise. Please to 

 indicate the points that occur to you which have not 

 already been adjudicated upon, and I doubt not that 

 we mav be able to secure a satisfactory solution of tho 

 doubtful complications, or, if not satisfactory, at least 

 such as may bo deemod authoritative. 



On December 28th ex-Governor Morrill again 

 wrote, and submitted a series of fourteen ques- 

 tions for opinions of the Supreme Court; but 

 Governor Garcelon declined to approve of 

 them, and they were not submitted. Subse- 

 quently the Governor and Council submitted 

 the following series of questions to the Court : 



1. When the Governor and Council decide that there 

 is no return from a city on which representatives can 

 be summoned to attend and take tlioir seats in tho 

 Legislature, is it their duty to order a new election; or 

 is it competent for the House of Representatives, if it 

 shall appear that there was an election of such repre- 

 sentatives, to admit them to scats, though no return 

 thereof was made and delivered to tho office of Secre- 

 tary of State? 



2. Is it competent for tho Governor and Council to 

 allow tho substitution of other evidence in place of the 

 returned copies of such lists as are provided for in arti- 

 cle 4, part 1, section 5, of the Constitution, to enable 

 them to determine what persons appear to be elected 

 as representatives to tho Legislature by a plurality of 

 all the votes returned ? 



3. Is a return signed by a minority of the selectmen 

 of a town, or the aldermen of a city, valid within tho 

 requirements of the same section ? 



4. Is a return by the aldermen of a city which does 

 not give the number of votes cast for each person voted 

 for as a member of the Legislature, and does not show 

 what persons were voted for as such member in any 

 one pi tho several wards of such city, a valid return 

 within the requirements of the same section ? 



5. Arc returns from towns or cities which are not 

 attested by the town or city clerk valid within tho 

 same section I 



8. Have tho Governor and Council a right to reject 

 returns of the election of members of the Legislature, 

 required by tho some section from tho officers of towns, 

 which were not mode, signed, and sealed up in open 

 town meeting ? 



7. Is the return of two persons purporting to be tho 

 selectmen of a town valid and sufficient evidence of 

 the vote of the town, when it appears that there were 

 at the time of the meeting at which the election was 

 had but two selectmen of that town } 



8. Can a person who is not a citizen of the United 

 States at the time be legally elected or constituted a 

 selectman of the town ? 



9. If a ballot has a distinguishing mark in tho judg- 

 ment of the Governor and Council, such as would make 

 it illegal under the statute, have they authority to dis- 

 regard it in their ascertainment of what persons appear 

 to DO elected, where it appears by the official return of 

 the officers of the town that such vote was received by 

 tho selectmen subject to the objection, and its legality 

 referred to the Governor and Council for* decision I 



10. If tho names of any persons appear in the return 

 Without any number of votes being stated or carried 

 out against them, either in words or figures, is it the 

 duty of the Governor and Council to treat those per- 

 sons as having the some number of votes as another 



ponton received for the same office, and whose name U 

 placed first in tho return, if they find dots under tlio 

 figures or words set against such other jicrson's name ? 



11. Have the Governor and Council the legal right 

 to decide what kind of evidence they will receive, and 

 what the mode of proceeding before them shall be, to 

 enable them to determine the genuineness of returns 

 required by the article and section of the Constitution 

 above mentioned I 



12. If the Governor and Council have before them 

 two liste of votes returned from the same town, differ- 

 ing materially from each other in the number of votes 

 returned as cast for the same persons, but identical in 

 all other respecte. both having been duly received at 

 the Secretary's office, and they have no evidence to 

 enable them to determine which is the true and genu- 

 ine return, are they required to treat cither of them as 

 valid, and if so, which i 



On January 3, 1880, the Court unanimously 

 made an answer to the questions, which was 

 entirely in opposition to the views of the Gov- 

 ernor and Council. The answer of the Court 

 is not inserted here, because it was unheeded 

 by the Governor, and on account of its length. 



Meantime the certificates of election had been 

 sent out to the members of the Legislature, and 

 that body convened on January 7th. Seventy- 

 eight Democrats and Nationals had received 

 certificates of membership in the House of Rep- 

 resentatives. That body assembled and pro- 

 ceeded to organize under the assistant clerk as 

 presiding officer. A committee introduced Gov- 

 ernor Garcelon, who administered the neces- 

 sary oath to each member who presented him- 

 self, and then stated that seventy-six had been 

 qualified. Only one Republican (Eugene Hale) 

 was qualified, but during the session of the day 

 another appeared and was qualified. Seventy- 

 six votes constitute a quorum of the whole House 

 of 150 members, and during all the preliminary 

 measures the objection was raised by the sin- 

 gle Republican member that there was no quo- 

 rum voting. This was overruled by the chair- 

 man. John C. Talbot was chosen Speaker by 

 72 votes, and the Clerk was then chosen by 74. 

 The objection of no quorum voting was over- 

 ruled by the Speaker, who said that he had the 

 highest authority for ruling that a majority of 

 the whole number elected constitutes a quorum, 

 and 70 was that number. 



The Senate was called to order by the Secre- 

 tary of the previous year. The Governor came 

 in and administered the oaths of office. When 

 it came to the election of officers the Republi- 

 cans did not vote, and the candidates of the 

 Fusion (Democrats and Nationals), Mr. Lamson 

 of Waldo County and Mr. Andrews of Augusta, 

 were respectively chosen President and Secre- 

 tary. 



The term of office of Governor Garcelon ex- 

 pired at midnight on the 7tb, and the President 

 of the Senate became ex officio Governor until 

 a successor should be elected by the Legislature. 



Thus far, nothing of an official authority had 

 appeared, except the documents inserted above 

 and the unheeded answer of the Supreme Court 

 to Governor Garcelon. On the Republican 

 side there was no official to speak, and what- 

 ever was attempted was merely the action of 



