Originally published in The Vidette-Messenger of Porter County on November 6, 1930.
COUNTY CLERK MAY REQUEST CHECK OF VOTE
To Await Outcome of Canvass of Tuesday’s Election Figures Before Deciding Sep to be Taken
RECALL RECOUNTS IN TWO ELECTIONS
Members of the Porter county election board are scheduled to meet this afternoon at the courthouse to canvass the vote for candidates on the various tickets at Tuesday’s election.
The board will go over the tally books to ascertain whether the right computations have been made, and will compile the totals of the candidates for certification to the secretary of state. The work is expected to be completed sometime tomorrow.
Members of the election board comprise: Mae R. London, county clerk; Owen L. Crumpacker, republican, and Joseph L. Doyle democrat.
Whether Mrs. London, who was defeated by Mr. Doyle for re-election will demand a recount of the vote will be determined following the canvass of the vote.
According to the vote returns, Mrs. London was apparently defeated by Mr. Doyle by 63 votes, although another tabulation gives only 62.
A difference of one or more votes in each of the 41 precincts of the county in favor of Mrs. London might turn the outcome around and result in her re-election, her supporters point out.
A cursory examination of the envelopes containing the mutilated ballots and those not counted by the election boards throughout the county reveals that few of the boards designated the number of such ballots so as to give a live on how many were rejected. Whether this number is great enough to warrant a recount would depend largely on the feasibility of such a move.
If the canvass shows no decided change, and the number of uncounted ballots are insufficient to change the result, then a recount would prove of little value as far as Mrs. London’s aspirations for retaining her office is concerned.
The only times when recounts were asked in history of Porter county politics were in 1928 when William W. Bozarth, Valparaiso, present prosecutor, and Clarence D. Wood, Chesterton, former prosecutor, staged a thrilling race which showed Bozarth had been nominated in the republican primary by eleven votes, and in 1892 when Heber Stoddard republican, defeated Joseph Sego, democrat, by three votes. In the latter case Stoddard won out by 5 votes in a recount before Judge John GIllett, which was later affirmed when an appeal was taken to the supreme court.
In the case of Bozarth and Wood, the former was declared the nomine after Wood had been adjudged a winner by 3 votes in the recount that followed.
In a contest before the Porter county commissioners Wood’s right to have his name placed on the ticket was upheld. Bozarth then appealed from the ruling to the Porter Superior court.
It was Wood’s contention that a number of students in the College hill ward had voted without right and all had voted for Bozarth.
In the hearing before Judge H.L. Crumpacker, a number of ballots ruled out as mutilated were declared regular.
After making deductions for the votes cast by students for Bozarth, where it was clearly established they were not residents of the city, the court found that Bozarth was the winner by 5 votes.
