Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1843-06-16

name and number, because that would make il
sary 10 change the subsequent numbers but that The
name aud number might be permitted 10 stand on The
poll as they were, and be deducted fom the whole
number the end Of the poll when The voting should
he concluded. In this request the pol! keeper gta
titled and The vote deducted accordingly. Ii is proper
TO state that this vote has been claimed since the cleo
ton as legal vote, but think no competent, 10
decide and being acquainted with the ground which
the vote was given rs il has been stated 10 by those
who know The Gaze, could doubt IFS l!egality Al Cen
reville, two votes recorded for Davis. which
afterwards contested, and rejected These were
not stricken from the poll-but the commissioners
report that they bad votes and not 10 be counted
and then they certify that Davis received certain num-
Der of votes minus these two. In regard to these two
votes nobody has pretended that they legal votes;
all know them to be illegal But no votes Lump
kin poll are crcumstanced these are; and if these
two VOTE = and the subtracted al the Court house,
were all counted for Davis, he would have majority
of and be entitled to the return Can il be deemed
ungenerous 10 ask, il this is not the true Of
objection 10 The of the commissioners touching
the three votes referred to- Do you think So gen
emcn? This has betrayed the authors Of the proceed
ngs Of the meeting the Court House the strange
inconsistency of denouncing the act of subracling
bad vote and of certifying two others 10 be bad and
not 10 be counted striking the foundation Of the
elective franchise; while for striking OF and ernsing
four others they have nothing to say In the one case
they world of ev-in the other they can per-
ceve no danger. Verify they may boast of "optics
keen. Surely there can be substantial difference
in The cases. Whether it be subtraction, the
vote is equally rejected, rather shown to be rejected
If one be right, must the other be. If either be
wrong, neither is right
The authors of the proceedings of the meeting al
the Court House do not pretend discuss The genera
question of the authority Of commissioners TO rejec
votes after they have been recorded But this, think
the only real question involved in regard TO all these
| For If cnm mi have he of reject
ing vote ALL after it has been recorded, think ne
will seriously contend, that they may reject by era
sure, and not by subtraction In truth, neither the era
The subtraction is the rejection ITSELF but only
the evidence of it. The rejection itself is the judg
ment OF the commissioners. Upon this question, bee
leave TO remark that have heard several persons as
sume that this power not erred by law The com
mssoners and then they argue that ought not TO be
conferred IN order TO prove the assumption that 1t Ii
not. The chief argumen, which have heard agans
the proprety of The power is, that corrupt commission
might abuse The power by striking off legal votes
This is doubt true but il is equally true, that they
may abuse their power, and perhaps with as i'll effect
IN the admission or lection of votes al the time they
are offered TO be polled Abuse of power is equally
possible in either case and multudes Of other
even more important, which constantly arising I'M
der our laws. But we are not to presume that power
will be abused in such cases, and therefore withhold IL
otherwise Government would soon stand still We
must confer many powers that may possibly be abused
1 -
abuse, promptly apply corrective. In regard 10 The
law itself It requires land the commissioners swear 10
observe i That all persons be admitted to vote Who are
entitled 10 do so, and that all he ected who are no,
entitled. There is nothing in the law itself 10 re-
strain limit the commissioners TO any particular mo
lnpnt for the admission lection of vote The law
limits the time for holding election and during thai
time the votes must be admitted or rejected II man
offer to vote and is not prepared at the lime to show
his qualification, his vote, It questioned must be reject
| ed. But will doubf. that he M afterwards,
during the progress Of The election, when he is pre-
pared to show his qualification, again tender his vote
and have il admitted All ready TO say, that the
commissioners must in such admit this mans vote,
although they had once rejected il; because the law
requires and they that they viii admit all per.
to vote entitled 10 do SO; and this show
himself entitled although he failed when he first cered
If, on the other hand, Gas frequently happens) man
not entitled to vote shall cast vote, and it shall be
recorded before the Commissioners become aware that
he is qualified TO vote and the vote be afterwards
contested and proved 10 be illegal, not The Com
missoners equally bound then TO reject il? Is not the
demand of the law and Of their oatls still re.
mindng them that they must "reject all persons not
SO entitled This is my view Of the matter. Ii IS
tue view which has been constantly, and SO far as ]
know, uniformly acted in the county OF k:ag X
Queen; and 1t seems to me to be perfectly iair,
common view. If the voter have no legal qua
lfcaton, it is illegal for him TO vote. If he, not.
withsiandng, obtrude himself upon Commissioners rs,
and illegally procure the admission of his vote, the
subsequent rejection of it only places all parties in the
position the law intends they shall occupy No injury
IS done 10 the voter, because he had right vote;
and the prompt rejection oft is but proper rebuke
of his illegal conduct. No injury is done TO the
candidate voted for, because he has right 10 the
advantage OF illegal vote. Justice is done TO the
opposing candidate and his supporters because the
law does not intend that they shall be prejudiced by
Illegal votes against them. This course contributes
to the prevention of troublesome, expensive and x
citing contests before the Legislature, by taking away
the cause Of such contests; and 1t nphods the true
and proper dignity Of the law, by discoun,enancinp
and thwarlng The designs and proceedings Of lis yio-
lators. KING X QUEEN.