Democratic Sentinel, Volume 3, Number 52, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 6 February 1880 — Two Opinions. [ARTICLE]

Two Opinions.

Tlie statement was made at the beginning of the trouble in Maine that the Fusionists were only proceeding upon the basis- of Supreme Court decisions, given on points submitted after previous elections by the leaders of the Republican party. The Augusta Standard has published an example of the way the machine worked in one instance and did not work in another the opinions being respectively given Dec. 22,1877, and Jan. 3, 1880, as follows:

“OPINION,” 1877, It is to be regretted that votes are lost by the negligence of town officers but tbe obvious remedy is to choose such askn w their du'y, and, knowing it, will perform It. John Appleton, C. W. Walton, W. G. Barrows, John A. Peters, Art emus Libbey, J. G. Dickenson, Wm. Wirt Virgin.

“OPINION,” 18?0. The representative 1b not to be deprived of liis right because municipal officers have neglected their duty.* John Appleton, C. W. Wal:on, W. G. Barrows, John A. Pe'ers, Artemus Libbey, Jos. W. Symonds, Cnas. Danforth.

If correctly stated, two conclusions are inevitable: First, that the Supreme Court knows more of partisan trickery than is necessary to the honest administration of justice; second, that the opponents to Republicanism have no show in the court of final resort. — Chicago News ( Independent ).