Gross Neglect Of Duty

It was the business of Secretary of State Jochim, State Treasurer iambitzer and Commissioner of the State Land Office Berry tb see that he votes cast on the salaries amendment were correctly canvassed. The onstitution of the state says that hey shall. It is not right that they should delégate their duty to any irresponsible clerk or clerks. The ! constitution prescribes the duties of the secretarv of state as being to keep the seal of the state, to be a member of ihe state board of auditors, and to be a member of the state board of canvasseis. Further than this the constitution i m poses no power u pon the secretary of state. The only duties expressly imposed by the constitution, aside f rom what the legislature might impose, upon the treasurer and commissioner of the land ofrlce is that they shall be members of the state board of auditors and of the state board of canvassers . " The excuse given by these three state officials for attaching their ñames to a canvass on the salaries amendment which was over 13,000 votes out of the way, is that they did not make the canvass, but allowed two clerks to do it. In other words, they did not constitute the state board of canvassefs, but delegated that power to two irresponsible clerks not recognized by the state constitution. At the very least this constitutes a gross neglect of duty. The constitution (Art XII, Sec. 8) says: "The governor shall have power, and it shall be his duty, to remove from office for gross neglect of duty or for corrupt conduct in office, or for any other misfeasance or malfeasance therein, either of the following state officers," and includes in the list the three offlcers in question. It is expressly made the governor's duty to remove from office for "gross neglect of duty." To relieve themselves frorn the charge of misfeasance or malfeasance these three state officers declare that they did not do the duty imposed upon them by the state constitution, which is the highest law in the state. What constitutes gross neglect of duty, if this does not ? Why has the governor not removed them? Possibly it is because he does not know which of the three they were guilty of, viz., gross neg lect of duty, corrupt conduct in office, or misfeasance. The salaries amendment more than doubled each of the salaries of these three menf It hardly seems prob able that they did not keep them selves posted as the returns came in on the amendment as to the way the vote was running. It would not be human nature, when so much was a stake for their own pockets, tha they should wait several weeks fo two clerks to canvass the returns. Then why were the governor's returns borrowed for the secretary of state's office, when that office hac one of the triplicate sets of returns exactly like the governor's? Wha was Jochim doing with the gover nor's returns at Ishpeming? He according to his own statement, die not even take the trouble to canvass the votes. Why were they de stroyed? Why were the treasurer's returns destroyed? Then, again, if the secretary of state's returns were not destroyed, whv were the county clerks written to send in new returns? , As has been well said, circumstances no stronger than these have been known to hang a man for niurder. three men who had several thousand dollars at stake, whose duty it was to canvass and keep on file triplicate returns; the returns incorrectly canvassed in twenty-five counties, making a difference of over 13,000 votes; the files destroyed, one set being destroyed in the home office of one of these men hundreds of miles from where the law recfuired it to be kept; what must the verdict be? The constitution makes it the governor's duty to act. Dan Soper was summarily turned out by Governor Winan's for far less than this. Why does not Governor Rich act?