The Seattle Post Intelligencer

CONTESTS A FAILURE.

The Recount Confirms the Official Canvass.

VAN DE VANTER'S ELECTION SURE

So Is That of Aakam and Nickerson—The Recount Complete and Challenged Votes Are Next.

The recount of ballots in the election contest cases was finished yesterday afternoon at 4 o'clock, and the results practically demonstrate that Van de Vanter, Aakam and Nickerson have been elected and the contestants have failed. The twelfth day of the count was occupied by the canvass of seventeen precincts, the highest of any one day since the proceedings began. Yesterday the board went over the vote of Leslie, Maury, Meeker, Meridian, Orillia, Osceola, Springbrook, Star Lake, Stuck, Sulke Creek, Sunnydale, Valley, Vashon, Wabash, West Seattle and White River. It may safely be said that the recount has been a disappointment to all the contestants, and the result proves that elections are conducted fairly and honestly north of Mason & Dixon's line. When the contestants filed their statements, it was their belief that many voters had marked the names of Moyer, Askam and Jones two or more times, aggregating hundreds, and that at least in the cases of Moyer and Jones, the local election boards had failed to count these ballots because of a circular letter issued by the republican central committee. Great, therefore, was the surprise of Moyer and his attorneys to find that, all told, there were only 187 ballots whereon his name had been designated by an X two or more times and that all of these had in fact been counted by the local boards except thirty-one. The recount developed another fact greatly to the confusion of Moyer and his friends. The official canvass of ballots as returned by the local election boards gave Van de Vanter a plurality of 78; the recount under the contest, laying all objections aside as frivolous, gives Van de Vanter a plurality of 20 votes over Moyer. Considering all objections made to ballots on both sides as valid, the summary sheets of the recount show Van de Vanter to have a plurality of 154 legal votes over Moyer. In other words, a plurality of the voters cast their ballots for Van de Vanter; many of them—about ten per cent. of the whole—marked their ballots in an informal manner, otherwise than as directed by law, and discarding all such, Van de Vanter still has a plurality of the unobjectable ballots. A result of the recount is that W. H. White and Richard Winsor, who at the beginning opposed the motion to quash the citation and declared against quibbles and technicalities, will be obliged to change their front or abandon the fight.

Below is given a table showing the legal vote, the challenges by groups, and the total vote counted in the entire county on sheriff:

Totals 4,428 4,408 3,457 165 12,458

Group A—Ballots marked inside name squares. B—X at top of party designa tion and also opposite names of candidates. C—Candidates designated two or more times with an X. D—X before and after either party name or candidate. E—X before and after party name. F—Distinguishing mark in writing. G—Distinguishing mark by scratching out candidates in addition to X. H—Designation of different party appellations at head and with X opposite names. I—No initials of election officer on back of ticket. Miscellaneous—The eccentric and irregular ballots, such as those where names of voters are written on back, others tickets crossed out, and distinguishing marks, and last, Col. James Hamilton Lewis ballot, where a legal opinion was rendered regarding the constitutional amendment.

In addition to the challenges given above, the entire vote of Houghton, Novelty, Franklin, Redmond, Renton, Preston, Sammamish, Hot Springs and Martin creek was challenged during the recount. These challenges appear on the top of the tally sheets and were for special reasons, such as lack of initials on all ballots, the ballot box not being sealed, or the precinct, as in the case of Martin creek, not being in King county. After challenges were so made the votes were counted as legal, subject to general objection, and the special objections were placed in groups. Should all these objections be held good, including Franklin, Van de Vanter's plurality of legal votes would be lessened by fifty-five, but this would yet leave him a plurality of 99 legal unobjectionable votes. Houghton, Novelty and Franklin precincts had the official stamp but no initials on the ballots.

The following table shows the results of the recount for each of the offices, the unchallenged, the challenged, and the total of both being given, together with the official vote as canvassed at the close of the late election. There is also added a column showing that each candidate has gained over the official vote, waiving all challenges:

[Table data merged narratively: For sheriff, Van de Vanter leads; similar for other offices confirming elections.]

Totals	......
Turner	......
Ostrander	......
Meyer	......
Van de Vanter
GROUP.

Legal	3,34	3,780	3,175	163	11,973
A	23	129	35	...	187
B	28	39	7	...	65
C	1	137	34	...	172
D	90	47	63	...	200
E	45	13	4	...	61
F	1	1	...	...	2
G	3	3	...	...	6
H	...	2	...	...	2
I	32	40	45	...	117
Miscellaneous.	251	227	93	2	573

Gabin on Recount...

Official Vota...

Total Recount...

Challenged .....

Unchallenged .....

NOMINEE...

For sinter	:	:	:	:	:
Van de Vanter	$354	474	4,428	4,417	11
Moyer	3,780	623	4,468	4,329	69
Ostrander	$178	251	$457	$331	136
Turner	163	2	165	161	4

For Commissioner—
Nickerson	1.146	153	1.299	1.294	5
Jones	906	120	1.035	1.010	16
Gufberson	853	5	555	381	5
Steers	22	12	44	35	9