That was then: Voting irregularities, inaccurate counting at polls. Sound acquainted?

Article content material continued

“On Monday evening there was some doubt as to the figures being precisely totaled however the revised figures right this moment go away the bulk then introduced, six, unchanged.”

One headline the next day summed up Kent’s unclear place: “MR. KENT TALKING OF PROTEST, BUT ISN‘T QUITE SURE.”

Kent had three choices: to just accept the outcomes; to problem the election; or to ask for a recount. He ultimately selected the latter, indicating he had “obtained studies alleging irregularities in a number of the polls in numerous elements of town.” Additional pressed, he stated solely, “I’m not ready to make these public but. However they’re ample to justify the motion which I intend to take.”

Kent submitted his affidavit and required $25 charge (about $1,300 right this moment), and the recount started that Saturday, 5 days after the election, with Decide Gunn presiding. The room the place the recount was carried out was closed to the general public. Solely Gunn, the 2 candidates, their legal professionals and a few information reporters witnessed what was clearly not a very speedy course of. The Citizen that night indicated that the rely was solely about one-third accomplished, however that Plant’s lead had elevated by six votes, to 12.

Because the rely continued Saturday evening, previous press time, Plant’s lead grew to 28, however by Monday it had shrunk to 21. The Citizen’s headline on Monday hinted on the tedious strategy of each poll counting and headline writing: “KENT REGAINED SOME LOST GROUND TODAY; PLANT’S MAJORITY NOW 21; CLERICAL ERRORS IN SEVERAL POLLS” famous the front-page headline, with the sub-headline providing this little bit of convolution: “In This Morning’s Depend of Polls in Victoria and Dalhousie Wards Kent Gained 5, Misplaced 2 and Had three Ballots Reserved. Plant Gained 2, Misplaced four and Had 5 Reserved. 92 Bins nonetheless to be Counted.”