Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1859-03-04

As it is universally considered that the
right of suffrage il the highest act of sover-
eighty. we must conclude that the Legislature
has thrown around the ballot-box all the pro-
lection necessary To secure the free and true
expression of the peoples will TO this end
it declares who are voters presents the mode
and manner of conducting the election, OF
comparing and purging the polls. and mpo-
sc, penalties and forfeitures, for illegal voting.
and unfaithfully conducting an election. In
some cases, as in the election law Of Virginia,
respecting Presidential elections, the law pre-
scribes that the Commissioners shall take an
oath generally for the faithful performance OF
their duty. See Code. page Is. AS the du-
ties Of the Commissioners were not prescribed
by the form of the oath. 1t was necessary to
prescribe in some other manner their duties;
and hence at page - of the Code, it is enac-
ted that it shall be the duty of the Commits
sioners to meet and compare the several polls,
and strike therefrom any votes which are IL
legal. In other cases, a. under the charter
of the city of Alexandria. the duties of the
Commissioners are prescribed by the form Of
the oath which they take, and therefore there
is no necessity for further provision upon the
subject. Thus under our charter, it ia pro-
vided that the Commissioners Of election
shall take the following oath: Il do solemnly
swear. tor affirm that | will truly and faith
fully receive and and return the votes OF such
persons as are entitled to vote Tor members
of the City Council Mayor and all other otti-
rers of the Corporation. elective by the peo-
ple in Ward No. -, and that Will not
knowingly receive or return the vote OF any
who is not legally entitled tothe same"
Thisk,ath then. is the law. 1t prescribes
first. what the Commissioners shall DO; Sc
condly. what they shall not do. They shall
faithfully receive and return the votes OF such
persons ~ shall be cuttled 10 vote; secondly,
they shall not knowingly receiv" or return
the vote of any who is not legally entitled to
vote.
The first branch Of their duty ia violated
when they refuse t. receive legal vote
when il is offered. or if after having received
it, they afterwards fail to return 1t.
This is the case, because they solemnly
swear both to receive and return every legal
vote. 1t is manifest then that they can ne-
Their refuse to receive legal vote, or after
having received refuse to return it; because
the oath prescribes the obligation both to re-
ceivs and return. 1t was not necessary to
provide in another section that Commission
srs shall not strike from the polls legal vote,
because the oath which is the law, had al
ready prohibited such an act.
Now let us consider what they shall not
do. They shall not either knowingly receive
or return an illegal vote. They shall neither
do the one nor the other If it was meant to
provide only that they should not knowing
ly receive and if they did unknowingly re-
ceive, and before the polls were certified they
should know that they had received illegal
votes. they could not afterwards refuse to re-
turn them. why impose upon them IN oath not
to do what they are compelled to do: why
make them swear that they will not knowing
" return illegal votes if it was the Intention to
prohibit them from doing that, by which alone
they could avoid perjury; that Is. to strike the
illegal vote from the polls. Will it be con-
tended that the law compels its own officers
to commit perjury, by making them swear
not To do that which they have no power to
avoid? They may receive and refuse t. re-
turn. but they cannot refuse to return with
out having first received. Yet it is provided
in the most solemn manner. under the sacred
obligation Of an oath, that though they
may have unknowingly received an illegal
vote. they shall not knowingly return it
Having unknowinglv received it, if they af-
forwards know it to be illegal how can they
avoid returning it. hut by striking it from
the polls. And this is manifestly their
solemn duty There never was conclusion
more entirely supported by law, Justice, and
common sense. JtSIlIla.