MARTIN WHITE WANTS
- FULLERTON'S OFFICE
(Continued rrora tirst page)
as aforesaid.
6. And your petitioner, for furth
er cause of contest, alleges that at
the close of said election on the 6th
day of November, 1918. the Judges
and Clerks of election In the differ
ent election precincts in said Colum
ns county, did proceed to canvass
ui'rt count the votes cast for the re
spective candidates for the different
offices, and among others, the votes
cast for the plaintiff and contestant
and the defendant and contestee, re
spectively, and did thereafter certi
fy and return, to the County Clerk of
said County of Columbia the nura
ber of votes so counted by the said
Judges and Clerks of election, Bnd
did certify the result thereof, as by
law required, to said County Clerk;
that thereafter the proper officers
or the said County of Columbia did
canvass the said votes so certified
and returned by the said Judges
and Clerks of election, and did cer
tify that the said plaintiff and con
testant received 7S3 votes and that
the said defendant and contestee did
receive 7S6 votes at the Baid elec
tion; that in the said counting, can
vassing and return of said votes so
cast at said election the said Judges
anl Clerks in the several precincts
of said Columbia County did er
roneously certify and return to the
number of votes cast at said election
for the said plaintiff and the said
defendant herein. In this, that the
said Judges and Clerks of election
did erroneously count and certify
that the said plaintiff received In
Apiary Precinct 16 votes, whereas in
truth and in fact the said plaintiff
received In said Precinct 17 votes,
and the said Judges and Clerks did
return and certify that the said de
fendant did receive in said Precinct
21 votes, whereas in truth and In
fact said defendant received only 2u
votes In said Precinct; that the saio
Judges and Clerks of election die
erroneously count and certify that
the said plaintiff received in Beaver
Falls Precinct 21 votes, whereas in
truth and in fact the said plaintiff
received In said Precinct 22 votes,
and the said Judges and Clerks did
return and certify that the said de
fendant did receive in said Precinct
13 votes, whereas in truth and in
fact said defendant received only Vi
votes in said Precinct; that the said
Judges and Clerks of election did
erroneously count and certify that
the said plaintiff received in Clats
kanle Precinct No. 1, 27 votes, where,
as in truth and in fact the said plain
tiff received in said Precinct 2S
votes, and the said Judges and Clerks
did return and certify that the said
defendant did receive in said Pre
cinct 26 votes, whereas in truth ana
in fact said defendant received only
25 votes in said Precinct; that the
said Judges and Clerks of election
did erroneously count and certify
that the said plaintiff received in
Clatskanie Precinct No. 2, 35 votes
whereas in truth and in fact the sala
plaintiff received in aald Precinct
36 votes, and the said Judges ana
Clerks did return and certify that
the said defendant did receive in
said Precinct ID votes, whereas in
.t . .1 n m DdM A t r A , t
ii mil nun in mil iiivt e ut:ii iiuuiii .
I received only IS votes; that the said,
Judges and Clerks of election did er-i
Ironeously count and certify that tho
! said plali.tif f received in Peer Iv 1
land Precinct 40 votes, whereas in
truth and in fact the said plaintiff
j received in said Precinct 4 1 votes,
and the said Judges and Clerks did
i return and certify that the said de
i fendant did receive In said Precinct
1 16 votes, whereas in truth and in
j fact the said defendant received only
1 15 votes in said Prcelnct; that tho
, said Judges and Clerks of election
did erroneously count and certify
that the said plaintiff received In
Goble Precinct 44 votes, whereas In
j truth and In fact the said plaintiff re
ceived in said Precinct 45 votes, and
! the said Judges and Clerks did re-
turn and certify that the said de
fendant did receive in said Precinct
24 votes, whereas In truth and I
fact the said defendant received only
23 votes in said Precinct; that the
said Judges and Clerks of election
did erroneously count and certify
that the said plaintiff received in,
Marshland Precinct 4 votes, whereas'
in truth and in fact the said plain
tiff received in said Precinct 5
votes, and the said Judges and Clerks
did return and certify that the said
defendant did receive in said Pre
cinct 3 votes, whereas in truth and
In fact the said defendant received
only 2 votes in said Precinct; that the
said Judges and Clerks of election
did erroneously count and certlt
that the said plaintiff received in
Mist Precinct 19 votes, whereas In
truth and in fact the said plaintiff
received in said Precinct 20 votes,
and the said Judges and Clerks did
return and certify that the said de
fendant did receive in said Precinct
20 votes, whereas in truth and in
fact the said defendant received only
19 votes in said Precinct; that the
said Judges and Clerks of election
did erroneously count and certify
that the said plaintiff received in
Oak Point Precinct 15 votes, where
as in truth and in fact the said plain
tiff received in said Precinct 16
votes, and the said Judges and Clerks
did return and certify that the sale
defendant did receive in said Pre
cinet 3 votes, whereas in truth and in
fact the said defendant received only
2 votes in said Precinct; that the
said Judges and Clerks of election did
erroneously count and certify that
the said plaintiff received in Pres
cott 5 votes, whereas in truth and
in fact the said plaintiff received in
said Precinct 6 votes, and the said
Judges and Clerks did return ann
certify that the said defendant did
receive in said Precinct 36 votes,
whereas in truth and in fact the said
defendant received only 35 votes in
said Precinct; that the said Judges
and Clerks of election did erroneous
ly count and certify that the said
plaintiff received in Rainlei Pre
cinct No. 1, 38 votes, whereas in
truth and In fact the said plaintiff
received in said Precinct 89 votes,
and the said Judges and Clerks ilia
return and certify that the said de
fendant did receive in said Precinct
SI votes, wheroas in truth and in
fact the said defendant received
only 30 votes in said Precinct; that
the said Judges and Clerks of elec
tion did erroneously count and cer
tify that the said plaintiff received
In Rainier Precinct No. 2, 33 votes,
whereas in truth and In fact the salti
plaintiff received in said Precinct
34 votes, and the said Judges and
Clerks did return and certify thai
the said defendant did recoive Ii.
said Precinct 16 votes, whereas in
truth and In fact the said defendant
received only 15 votes in said Pre
cinct; that the said Judges and
Clerks of election did erroneously
count and certify that the said plain
tiff received in Rainier Precinct No.
3, 45 votes, whereas in truth and in
colved in SplUenber, Trocinct Ik! then d thw. would I have ; Pur.l-
.... I.. f,.o liy Ol WYi-u ! -
VOleS, Wliereiis ill irum hiim
the said plulntlff received In said
above the number of legal votes cast
i,. .u i,l iiiirendant and would be
Precinct 30 votes, and the ""'' ; 0)uctet to said office and entitled to
Judges and Clerks did return and a r(,rtjfi0Hte thereof and to hold the
certify that the said dofendant did
receive In said Precinct 4 votes.
whereas In truth and in ract me sam
nifire of County Judge.
9. That It Is necessary and proper.
In ordor that a true and correct ro
defendant received only 3 votes l,,lirn aj canvass of tho votes cast at
said Precinct; that the said JuiIkb I wut, election may bo had and a true
and Clorks of election did erroneouB-1 (IM(1 corrtMt j,Kmiiit may be mail
ly count and certify tluit the salil i )(1 t(J ,.lt,C f tlie electors of
plaintiff received in Yankton Pre- m((, CHlmly for offlco of County
clnct 26 votes, whereas In truth anu Ju,K0 tmt ,n legal ballots so cast at
In fact the said plaintiff received J1 election should bo recounted
said Precinct 27 votes, and tho sab , rcnnvuKsed. and the errorH and
Judges and Clorks did return ' mlHtakes of said Judges and ClerVs
rerllfv that the mild defendant did , -
niatnt iitn it tin ii 111 tin I horttf toi COI
receive In said Precinct 31 oleH- rrt,,,. and that In order that a true ;
whereas In truth and In fact the (g Cl)rrp0t canvass and return of the
defendant received only 30 votes 111 f l..KM 1 votes cast for the said candl-l
said Precinct; that the said Judges ,,,,, nt nM election mny bn had.
and Clerks of election did erroneous-. h() ml,(, n,Kn vog Bt 0nst at said
ly count and certify that the said , ,,, !,id be deducted from the.
i nln nt IT received 111 ternnnin irr- , ,i,, r v.,i... fmiiul iimin
fact the said plaintiff received in clnct 29 votes, whorens in truth aim rHnvl, to have been cast fin '
kJriristitms GW.
said Precinct; mat me sam au.isv. ( , nt n(1 )
and Clerks of election did erroneous-. Uf ml,(, ,,,, V(
ly count and certify that the said j ,,, iuid ,
plaintiff received in crnonla Pre- , nnllli,r f
cinrt 29 votes, whorens in truth ami! ... ,., i
In fact the said plaintiff received In j . . . rtfniilini.
salfl Precinct 30 votes, ana tne sam, wll0rforH the plaintiff and con
Judges and Clerks did return nJ!teHUt herein prays that It may be
certify that the said dofendant rtlv. (!)rmtne( y the Circuit Court that
receive In said Precinct .7 votes (1(,fniHlti w j Kullerton.
whereas In truth and In fact the sa d . t ,,.,,, Bl, t1Bt t said
t..rA...l..n Ai(vMri nntv 9 K votes In ......... i
u. .... ......... -- . i rlPcnoll me iiaiiiiiii niw cimivniuiii,
HUH! ITet-'Hli:i , umi I'm , VI'I.IIA iuhm jltllv ItlMf-ffVl 111
ly count and certify that the saldlgIU clerks of election did crroti . . . ffl); of t.unty ju,g- f,n
plaintiff received in St. Helens Pre-;OU!,iy count and certify that the Hali, , ,,,,,,, ,,rln
clnct No 1. 70 votes, whereas In i, plaintiff received In IWarren l''. ,, for such other and further re
truth and In fact the said plaintiff C,nct 63 votes, whereas In truth and , ,. , J(11(l
said Precinct 46 votes, and the said
Judges and Clerks did return and
certify that the said dofendant did
receive In said Proclnct 28 votes,
whereas In truth and in fact the
said defendant received only 27 votes
in snld Precinct; that the said Judges
and Clerks of election did erronoous-
recolved In said Precinct 71 votes, !in fact tho said plaintiff received In
and the said Judges and Clerks dta said Precinct 64 votes, nnd the said
return and certify that the said do
fendant did receive In said Precinct
81 votes, whereas in truth and in
fact the said defendant received only
Judges and Clerks did return an
certify that the said defendant d.f
receive in said Precinct 69 voles.
whereas In truth and In fact the said
nnd legal In the premises
MARTIN WHITE.
Plulntlff and Contestum.
V llmm K. Hums
Attorney for Plaintiff and Contest,
ant.
80 votes In said Precinct; that the defendant received 69 votes In suld
said Judges and Clerks of election i precinct.
did erroneously count and certify! 7. That at the said election thit
that the said plaintiff received in St. 1 nald plaintiff herein received 804
Helens Precinct No. 2, 109 votes, votes, whereas tho said Hoard of
whereas in truth and In fact the said Canvassers returned and certified
plaintiff received In said Precinct that he only rocelvod 783 votes, and
110 votes, and the said Judges and nt the said election the defendant
Clerks did return and certify that ; received 765 votes, whereas the said
the said defendant did receive In said ; Hoard of Canvassers did return and
PpAnlnnf 1A1 vntna -Kn.n.. n - . 1. . I . .... I I .1 . . I .... I HA
inr in facVthe siild defendanV method White
cetved only 159 votes In said Pre- "e premise, said oUWtiff receded " l Zom Vcret Z ' a'
pini- thn tha . i.i i, i..... m . .. .1 .. i. .. i elusion, is a profound secret, ai a
It Is evident that either White 01
his attorney aro mind readers, for
lie, him or they run tell just hnw
man voted. The Judges and clerks of
elections, according to White's com
(ilulnt, were very stupid men, for In
almost every Instance (where a pre
cinct didn't give a majority for
White) the count was erroneous. H
Clerks of election did erroneously ! , number of votes cast for said wm ' aiimi th ih,
count and certify that the said defendant and was duly elected to I '"""A1, "'a ' " ''K j
Plaintiff received in St. Helens Pre-, ,he said office of County Judge AJ rXX
LlllL'f. ,1. .1.1 VIHHH. w Rrnna in i in oitiuiml in vnna v tk mirlirientn nr '
truth and In fact the said plaintiff ! rUch election to hold said office.
received in said Precinct 34 votes, j 8. That the said Hoard of Can
and the said Judges and Clerks dtdlvamers did certify to the election of
return and certify that the said de t;ie Laid dofendant on the ttth day of
fendant did receive In said Precinct November", 1918, and not before,
o votes, wnereas in truth and in ; and 40 days have not elapsed since
detected and White land a county
Job for another six years.
Miftumlci-NUMMl
She Wasn't It awful? I nearly
had a bat In my head last night.
fact, the said defendant received only the return day of said election aim I That's where you genurally
IE 1 .1 Tl - I . . . 1. . . , ! .. .. ..... . U..n t.-..MUM ' I, .. I .. 1
75 votes in said Precinct; that the1 the snld certificate of election was'bave 'em. San Francisco Chronlclo
said Judges and Clerks of election ; made by the said Hoard of Canvas-! '
did erroneously count and certify ; sera; and that if the said illegal Charles M. Schwab, as the director
that the said plaintiff received in j votes so cast for the defendant andiof shipbuilding In tho t'ntted States,
Scappoose Precinct 82 votes, where- so counted and returned as votes fot llavo under him over 450,000
as in truth and in fact the said plain- the defendant as aforesaid are taken ".
tiff received in said Precinct 83 from the number of votes so certl-'
votes; and the Bald Judges and fled and canvassed as being cast for I Htoiruich Trouble
Clerks did return nnd certify that th, him, said defendant. It would reduce "llefore I used Chumberialn's Tab
said defendant did receive In said j the number of his legal votes below lets I doctored a great deal foi
Precinct 81 votes, whereas In truth ; the number of legal votes given to stomach trouble and felt nervous ana
and In fact the said defendant re- j the plaintiff for the snld office oi tired all the time. These tablets help
ceived only 80 votes in said Pre-1 County Judgo, and by deducting ' ed me from the first, and Inside of a
clnct; that the said Judges and Clerks same would give to the plaintiff week's time I had Improved In every
of election did erroneously count 7 83 votes and would give to tho de- way," writes Mrs. U. A. Drlnkard.
umi. m pimmm r-, ienciain r( votes nnd tne pialntirr Jerrersun City, Mo
Desserts
should be wholesome and
delicious. We have numer
ous "goodies" to tempt
you with.
Mince Pies
Puddings, Plum Cakes,
Eclairs, Cakes with fancy
icing and everything you
could desire to add to the
Christmas feast. Dainti
ness and purity combine in
everyone of our products,
CREAM PUFFS
RAISIN BREAD '
DOUGHNUTS
Ramsey's
BREAD
We cair a nice line oi
CANDIES and .
LIGHT GROCERIES
Drop in any time and try
a cup of our
GOOD COFFEE
Thank You
t I I I " ' , , i t
Clot rtes J '
Near Postoffice The WorkingmanV Standard "Dick for Duds"
1 jIE-
J 1 I i r t J m
mru
S I JW III 11
Shop Eaurh and get the
j JSetiQttt of
ft! ksa
vSr on
1
t A Few Suggestions Just Before Christmas. Our Line of Goods is Exceptionally Attractive
I I I i
.
x
Bath Robes
Bags and Suit Cases
$4.50 to $10.00
Belts, in fancy boxes
$1.50 to $15.00
25c to $1.00
Trench Caps, in latest styles .
$1.50
Cuff Links and Tie Clasps in
boxes 50c
COLLARS, both Soft and Linen in
the latest shapes
Garters and Arm Bands, in fancy
, boxes 25c and up
Dress Gloves, all sizes
$2.50, $3.00
WORK GLOVES, cotton, wool and
leather
Knitted Toques, in all colors . .
75c and up
Ladies' Silk Hose, black and
white 85c, $1.00, $1.50
Fursgs and Pocket Books
50c and up
Suspenders, in fancy boxes
50c, 65c, $1.00
DRESS SHIRTS in large variety
SWEATERS and JERSEYS in all
colors
Umbrellas for Oregon weather
$1.25 to $5.00
UNDERWEAR makes an appropriate
gift
Men's Fancy and Plain Silk
IIose 65c to $1.00
Biggest and Best line of Macki
naw $8.50 to $17.50
STAG SHIRTS, WOOL SOX-in
fact Everything for Men
OIL CLOTHING
LEGGINGS
PANTS and SLICKERS
NIGHT SHIRTS and PAJAMAS, in
cottpn and outing flannel
Nifty Holiday Neckwear
Our line of Neckwear is beyond comparison. We have,
without a doubt, the most exclusive collection of Ties in
the county. In fancy boxes
50c, 65c, 75c, $1.00
A Suit of Clothes
- - $20.00 to $50.00
or : "
- - $20.00 to $40.00
Suits and Overcoats
4
Overcoats