The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1868-11-28

|
years who was an inhabitant of the State at
the time Of the adoption OF the constitution,
| and the oath required them TO swear that they
| had been residents Of the State for one year
preceding the 10th of November; and IT was a
fortunate thing for the validity OF the electlon,
he continued, that it was not exaeted IN every
instance. IF an informality had been com
mitted. il was q fortunate informality which
saved the infraction of the substance Oh this
The counsel then said he had admitted, for
the sake Of argument, that lnformahtles e4-
listed, and that the board had the power TO SET
aside the election if they thought proper. 6ut
the real question is, shall the man VINO an nag
received o majority Of legal votes be mayor
Shall law, principle or prejudice preVallf ne
made this claim. BY tho evidence presented
one of two candidates has received o majority
of the legal votes cast, and he asked them only
to install that candidate in the position to
which the law entities him. The evidence
showed that although the election was attend,
ed with ipformalities, those informalities did
not in single instance violate the spirit ol
the law.
Counsel cited in support of the general view
of having regard to ihe substance Of the re.
turns, Cushing, sec. 16S, p. 64, where is laid
down the proposition, that II the return DC
good in substance, it will not be impeachod tor
want Of formalities; and he contended that
vet if they camo up here and swore to the cor
recSness Of the returns, tho defect was cured.
| Tho cases cited in Cushing he contended moro
than covered the case of the claimants; they
were only called upon to substantlate tho fact
that there was q good election, and nothing
had vet been developed which touched the
substance of the election. He believed 1t to be
the duty OF the board to simply make up their
minds upon the evidence before them, as to
which of the two candidates received the
| greatest number Of the votes cast; ne denleu
| their right to declare that there had been no
| ocction, but if they assumed the power, they
had not sufficient evidence to warrant them IN
dong 80; he believed his clients entitled to
prana fdcie declaration of tbeir election and
that having been made, the election could be
| contested; but until that declaration had been
made there was no other step for the board to
| take.
I'm conclusion, counsel asked the board,
upon the law and the evidence. to for6ear to
| declare there was no election, but to declare
who was elected at the good and substantial
election held on the 10th Of November.
At the conclusion of MIR. Chamberlaln'5 argu-
ment. the board, on motion of Alderman Will
den, took recess OF fifteen minutes.
At the reassembling Of the board, the argu-
ment for tho claimants was resumed.
Mr. Corbin arose and said it was not his in
| tention to detain the board any great length
of time, inasmuch as his associate had 30 we'll
submitted the case to their consideration. He
| would only claim their attention to few
points inadvertently omitted by his preueces-
sor. 1t was not his intention to weary them
by any elaborate exposition OF the law, but
bring his points to their MIND IN as unpreIesd-
| ing manner as possible.
He thought the board had consumed great
portion of valuable time IN useless discussion,
and had CROPPED their way into an ine1trlcabe
| labyrinth. IF they had been endeavoriDg to as
certain whether Mr.. Lesesne or MIR. Pllsbury
was elected Mayor of Charleston they could
hope to arrive at some result. but there has
been useless waste Of time in the considsra-
tion of question entirely beyond their juris-
diction-a question which the courts OF justice
a,one could decide. The election should have
| been declared and, before that was done, tho
case was entirely beyond their control. He
looked upon the advancement Of this protest
as actuated only by motives OF chagrin and
disappointment caused by the defeat OF the
| protcstants candidate. He could understand
how the board might be influenced by the long
array OF highly respected names attached to
that paper, aud considered it important 30 look
into this matter, but in dong so they have not
followed any legal precedent. Heth alluded
to the fact that it was point assumed oy op-
posing counsel that tho managers were not all
sworn according to the manner prescribed by
| the law, but he would call attontion TO the or
| binary manner of administering oaths, by which
the party was merely required to sign and give
| an Affirmative answer 10 the question, DO you
swear 2" Aud there were many cases in which
managers were so sworn.
He then made legal reference TO show that it
was not necessary for every manager to qualify;
that when authority is granted to three or
more persons it shall be construed as giving
such authority to q majority. SO that il two
managers alone were qualified, it docs not al
feet the validity of the proceedings OF the
board.
A great stress was laid upon the fact that
some books belonging to Ward were destroy
ed, but the law decides that Irregularities will
not invaidate the proceedings when there is q
good and Substantial election. And, at the
| sumo time, as there was no explicit instruc-
tons rs To the preservation OF their ballots and
records, they could not have been expected TO
have done so; they acted in the most natural
manner, as every enc under similar clrcunl-
stances would have DONE lie next referred to
the point as to whose duty it was to aggregate
the entire votes. When power is granted to
any man, or set of men, all the incidental power
| is necessarily included, and though there is no
! express injunction that the Mayor should aS-
| gregate the votes, he is commanded TO declare
which of the candidates has received majority,
and il order to do so it is necessary for him to
sum ND the figures returned by the managers.
And in his construction OF the law the Mayor
should have done so before Council had right
! to consider this case.
Mr.. Corbin then urged upon the board the
necessity OF carrying out the spirit OF the law
in tho consideration OF this e.tlon; and /!
| the managers of the late election have acted ~
the best OF their ability. and have accoinDiisll-
| cd Il good, substantial result. the ends OF law
wero accomplished. aid the little irregularities
that may have taken place can have no effect
upon the fnal result.
The next point considered was, there not
being am polling place in Ward No. 8, which
opposing counsel had regarded as an in
| tringement OF the statutes regulating the
| Municipal election. HIS construction Oh the
section OF tue act bearing upon this point was
1t was not necessary for the polling precinct to
| be in the particular ward, but that one or more
precincts should be designated for each ward;
| that 1t was ut first contemplated, and would
have been perfectly admissible, to locate all the
precincts in one portion Of the city, designating
one or more for each ward.
! He then alluded to his connection with the
Municipal election, IN reply to the assertions
| of the counsel of the protestants, as to his be-
ing the great source Of enlightenment tor the
managers, Independently OF the law, and
brought to the memory OF the board the testi-
mony OF a witncss who avowed having received
| instructions from him, stating that his opinion
was requested by rejected voters, other parties
| having used their names, and merely said he
thought them entitled to u vote, which opinion
| they requested in writing, AMI he complied.
| He would also state that these parties were
staunch Democrats.
He now took into consideration the registra-
tion oath, which he pronounced as illegal,
contrary to the constitution Of the State, and
therefore not rightfuly to be exacted from any
i fla oFt tIa 1an al Ia ot11rQ ra-