Burlington hawk-eye. [volume] (Burlington, Iowa) 1845-185?, 1851-10-02
FRIDAY.s.:.::::..sEPTEMBER %, 1881.


FHlDA :::::SEPTEMBER %, 1881.
- \ ~ csnu 1sssrssr enes more.
The Gssstis, speaking in behalf Of Judge Ma
-, says that il he had ordered new election
he(wssn the two candidates for Recorder, he
would have been exercising an unauthorized pow
q. How very scrupulous locofoco,sm sometimes
leeoues. An unauthorized power! Is he SO
vsll satisfied, that in taking the election away
Asn the people and deciding il himself, he was
exercising power that was authorized BY law !?
"A Doe he now seek an excuse for having tram
IA upea law and justice, BY the pretence that
= v,s scrupulously adhering to what he deemed
H. law1 II is not the first time, as it will not
y u last, that outrages have been committed
a popslar rights, under the same empty pre-
trsce q abstainlng from the exercise Of doubtful
pswera
4 II Gazette maintains that the election was
~ ssaef ne old law, and that il IS only the
- Nv which gives the County Judge authority
sSadsfa new election. This position the Ga
.slis thinks impregnable, fortified as he seems to
~ Il b, BY the opinion Of the editor Of the
1kwk-Eye, "previously stated privately and pub
IN, hat the tie between the candidates would
laSe 10 Be decided before the Commissioners
Ciak, under the provisions Of the old law,
New, We are Aattered at the Difference paid by
- Gaaeste, to what he seems to think was an
epsilon expressed BY us-especially as it hap
~ that il was the reverse Of the opinion said
h have been given BY the County Judge, imme-
laisly aftee his return, to one of the candidates.
ysdge Mason was then Of opinion that the decis-
ien d the lie BY lot, BY the County Commission
~ Clerk, would have been illegal; the Gazette
~ argues for him, that such was the only pro-
psr way to have decided the question, because
Ne Code had not taken effect upon the election
Of Recorder.
We think this IS the weakest attempt 10 justi-
& the conduct Of the County Judge that we have
yet seen. Il is crawling out at very small hole.
There have been, in difIeren, parts Of the State,
very different opinions entertained and expressed
q 10 The time when the new Code took effect
TAe opinion of thee County Judge, however, is the
ncst convenient one that we have yet heard of.
According to theGazette's report Of his decision,
i itsnounts to something Ike this-that the Coun-
y Judge was elected under the Code, and so far
y Ae was concerned, the election was conducted
ssder the Code-bat the election of Recorder
was under the old law, and was conducted under
- Old law. Such judicial decision is worthy
Z being reported alongside Of many others to be
1ssnd in Rradford's Iowa Reports!
The Gazette and the County Judge are of opin-
10 then, It seems, that although the Judge was
elected under the Code, that the Recorder was
slseted under the old law, and this is the answer
Aey make to the demand why that provision of
he new code has not been observed, which pro-
sides Tor new election in case Of a tie, and the
rejection OF any ballots as double, as occurred in
Flint River township. The Gazette says that
,he Judge could know nothing Of the result of
the canvass for Recorder, because he was await
Ing the result of that canvass, to know if he was
himself elected. Suppose the returns had been
al in and the canvass made the day after the eec-
tion. and the County Jadge-instead Of being
away on an excursion to the East-had been pres
mt, ready to be quali6ed-and had been sworn
into Office, the day after the elections as the GA
zette contends, the duties Of the Commissioners
Clerk cease upon the Judge being sworn into Of
ice. If he had been sworn in Immediately, what
would have been his duty in reference to the tie
between the candidates for Recorder? Obvious
y his duty would have been TO have ordered
,ew election, by reason of the rejected ballots of
Flint River. II such wonld have been his duty,
lnder the circumstances, if he had been sworn in
he day after the election, what is his duty when
worn in twenty-eight days later? Is il any less
lis duty to order the new election, because he
las waited four weeks before being qualified into
'fice? The state of facts before him is the
sns, that they would have been If he had been
Iuali6ed the moment the canvass was made. He
,as the power, by being Immediately sworn in,
], putting it out Of the power Of the Commits
lioners' Clerk to decide the tie by casting lots
between the two candidates. How then can the
County Judge contend, with any show of reason,
hat the COMMISSIONER Clerk was the proper
person to decide the tie by casting lot He had
tne power At any moment to deprive the Clerk Of
~ power whatever, by being himself sworn into
Nice.