Daily national Democrat., 1858-09-16
.u.,u,r, NO, Legally Made. y

eursory examination, and might be in error
in our conclusions but that it seemed to us
that the Board of Supervisors should have
paid some attention to n plain requirement
laid down in the statute We were aware
that the Courts had ruled in nearly all the
States, that a mere informality in the making
up, or irregularity in the Transmission, of re-
turns does not invalidate the election at any
given locality, after the votes have been can
vassed and the result Of the election declared
provided it appears on investigation that
there has been no fraud or other vtiating
circumstance This, we conceived, did not
relieve the Board of any responsibility, il
they acted without any sufficient warrant.
Although, it might be that when the election,
! in such case came to be contested, it would
appear that there had been no fraud, and
that the returns had not been tampered with,
although there was opportunity to tamper
with them, yet, notwithstanding all this, if the
Board had not been sufficiently careful in the
discharge of their duty and sufficiently re-
! gardful Of the law, they were none the less
to blame because the affair happened to
turn out all right instead of all wrong. 1t
is very probable that the returns in this in
stance are all right, have not been tanpered
with, but there is certainly nothing what
ever to show that they have not. The fact
that there was no endorsement of the post
master upon them to the effect that they had
been mailed by one of the judges of the cleo
ton, is ample evidence that they may have
been tampered with, and may not be the
same returns in every respect that were made
up at the polls.
Now, the law specifies very minutely what
is required in an election, and then gives the
Board of Canvassers a certain amount of dis
cretion in regard to informal returns, which
amount Of discretion is comprised in the fol-
lowing section:
No tally paper poll list, or certificate, re-
turned from any election shall be set aside
or rejected, for want of form, nor en- account
of its not being strictly in accordance with
the directions of this Act, if the same can be
satisfactorily understood.
This language does not refer to the en-
dorsement of postmaster on the returns, or
anything of the kind. 1t refers to the tally
paper, poll list, and certificate attarhed to the
poll list aud tally, as is evident from the pre-
ceding section which connects with the one
just quoted. Read the two sections together,
and it is evident:
As soon as all the votes are read off and
counted, a certificate shall be drawn up on each
of the papers containing the poll list and
tdLlies, or attached thereto, stating the num-
Der of vetes ench person voted for has receiv-
! ed, DC Each certificate shall be signed Oy tL =
clerks. judges, and Inspector; one of said Ger.
tifcateS with the poll list and tally paper to
which it is attached, shall be retained by the
inspector, and preserved by him at least six
months, &c. The other of said certificates
with the poll list and tally paper to which it
is attached, shall be sealed up by the inspec-
tor, and indorsed election returns" and be
directed and be delivered or sent by the in
spector to the county clerk of the county in
which the election is held.
No tally paper, poll list or certificate re-
turned from any election, shall be set aside
or rejected for want of form, nor on account
of its not being strictly in accordance with
the directions of this act, if the same can be
satisfactorily understood"
1t will be observed, too, that the law ex.
pressly states that, for certain specified kinds
Of informality, the returns shall not be reiec-
ted. The inference is, that, for other kinds
of informality or irregularity, they shall be.
The Importance attached to every require
ment laid down in the statute is quite evil
dent, from the fact that the trainers of the
law thought it necessary TO make an excep
tion from the strict carrying out of the same
in the case of these informal poll lists tallies,
and certificates attached to them In the
other cases it makes no exception, and one
of those other cases is where the postmaster
has made no endorsement on the returns,
that he received them from the hands of a
properly authorized party.
:" A reader of the Democrat" in yesterdays
Express, who seems to be a very sensible
man, says:
Postmasters and Judges of Election, Ito
the extent Of mailing the returns.) are mere
ministerial officers; and by their negligence,
or omission to perform their duty, cannot
impair the rightsgof third parties
This may be true enough. But we are not
talking about the rights of third parties-
We are talking about the duty of the Board
of Supervisors. Have they any right to
make exceptions, in canyassing returns, where
the law has made none?
There are other points in this question
which we might notice, but we do not know
that it is necessary We thought it due to
the people of this county that they should
know what was done, in matters of grave
Importance, by their public officers. If
those officers have done right, and the peo.
pie are satisfied, we have nothing more to
say But, we shall always demand Of the
servants of the people, so far as we may be
competent to demand it, full explanation of
any conduct on their part, the legality of
which may be in any manner questioned
In conclusion we may remark, that the
Express, in refusing to accord to us "a su.
perhcial knowledge of the law" is not as
generous towards the DEMooRAr as we are
towards it. We are willing to acknowledge
that the Express has "a superficial nowledge
of the law" and rery superficial knowl-
edge of it, at that