The national Republican. [volume] (Washington City [D.C.]) 1866-1870, 1868-11-16

MT. Mefrfck. Your honors, when the case
fsn q the Ps wsia IN spiasnos ed Here ere
isAsummary OF the result in each precinct Of
80. .saar !La. Carroll Meade.
First precinct. ....,........... 200 2o7
Second precinct. ........... 1e4 l15
Third precinct. 20t I'll
Fourth preeict........"....... los az
Fifth preeinet...--,............ lao lol
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. GAL sT2
In the Fifth precinct beside, there were I
votes for Joseph Carroll not entering into this
%Sad j. i sa ''TTR'sa sa case. %S, a
Nj. Riddle objected, that there was no proof
votes Of Registered voters. There was as. some
list Of registered voters In the case, but he did
mot know where II was. . r. -
your %S case T ssss v'hdSu er e TO fi ss
III, Riddis Would ID DO willing to risk the case
Judge Cartier. 1t cannot be reviewed cx-
oept BY this court.
Mr.. Cook said that the defence would show
persons not legally registered, and that these
voters voted for Mr.. Meade.
Bowen, Mayor OF wssSinstoS. ''
Sayles J. bowen sworn: Witness was one
Of the registers OF election until some time In
ouestion. viii you state II any soldiers
presented themselves for registration
The Sourt. state Your objection.
Mr.. DsSiase argued that the action of the
registers was conclusive, and could not be re.
IN ta, snS TIE had
be impeaohed eollaterally.
Judge Cartier. Have you authorities.
Mr.. Davidge; There are authorities. and we
Judge Cartier. II 10 common practice for
the Court to issuss nnandanius to the registers.
nAu I.lnA N n. a. IL.
merely say that is the proper remedy; but we
claim that the decision OF the Registers cannot
be impeaehed collsterally.
Is the Court merely here to correct clerical
Mr. Davidge said the Court was here as the
registers were-to decide the case under tho
Judge Cartier held that the board Of regis
.osSS Tseey Ssa been a.
test over votes out of the Influence OF the
Judss oha insiast sa that he disagreed with
the opinion OF the Chief Justice. He would
prefer to hear the case argued.
not united in opinion II would be well that the
argument on the question should proceed
regularly. That question was: whether or
OF corporation ofiieers, which right had been
be questioned collstersliy in a proceeding to
Judge wyiie said thathe had au opinion on
the subject, but he was not immovsLle In H.,
and would be glad to hear argument.
show that IN tho examination Of contested
election cases under a statute, the statute
alone was 70 ee considered. and not me CON.
was to be examined into, the court would go
behind all lists and all elections to ascertain
expressed his astonishment at the position
which the counsel for the petitioner dared to
maintain, 10 the nineteenth century, In this
HSs ri aovefnneas, they desired fair
nsy nndsr sRe
court. We shrink from no uncovering OF
fraud.
M. Riddle called the attention O. ne oonr!
he n: %ss q Y 20 se Ct yS
cause the law goyeIning reEistration had ~ not
been T IN not d.y
because the registers had performed judicial
onfd Sot Be- Inquired iaiS Now
functions doe. not prevent mere facts from
courts Of record whose proceedings were thus
The court hero took shOr. recess. Upon
Mr. Dsyidse argued that II mattered not
what right a party might have to vote. TN
right 70 vote grew out 81 iekisiatife enhet
ment, and the Withholding OF such RICH
worked no wrong to natural right: In WI IN,
he ss aS
the proceedings OF the Board OF RegistratioI
reviewable only on mandamui. Any other eon
struction would make one law before the eiee
tion and another law afterwards. ConsIes
had given this court Jurisdiction over election
cases, but gave u Jurisdiction under the law
suppose, As an example, one hundred men ap
piled to be registered, were refused, bur ne
elected to ask for mdnddmus to the Board o
Registration, and their votes were not 70
ceivedi the election being concluded, the &c
turns show A to have a majority OF over hftl
over II. But these hundred persons apply y
this court, and II the view OF the other side b.
carried out, the court would admit the on
hundred voters, practically hold a new cleo
tion, and make decree that IL was elected D
fifty majority over A. What was this but tn
holding OF an election BY the COURT
1t had been argued that the pt1eeedlnss
any body, although judicial, could be reyiewe'
record. Why the High Court OF Chaneery 0
England was not court OF record. Courts
martial, boards OF Inspectors OF roads, tn
Corporation OF Washington, when acting upo
subjects within their Jurisdiction, could no
have their action reviewed BY the courts. II
concluded by declaring that the law never 70
tended that machinery OF elections should b
intssfersd with by courts Any more than by Ii
Mr.. Merriek asked leave to- suggest th
Board Of Registrstion was subordinate ~
bunal established by Copgress to aacertAi
the right OF q citizen to the elective franchise
and heard eyidenoe 10 relation to the mattel