The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1868-12-07
THE CONTESTED ELECTION.
Proceedings before the South Carolina
Supreme Court-in Columbia.

On Friday last, before the Supreme Court Of
this State, in Columbia, Associate Justices
Willard and Hoge being present, Messrs. Cor
bin and Chamberlain moved for writ of man
damus to the acting Mayor and Aldermen OF
Charleston to command them to install Mr..
Gilbert Pillsbury and his Aldermen, or show
cause to the contrary. The following is the
suggestion on which the motion was founded:
THE STATE OF SOUTH cARoLNA-cHABLEsTo
COUNTY.
To the Honorable the Supreme Court Of South
Carolina:
Your petitioners Gilbert Pisbury, W. R. II.
Hampton, Malcolm Brown, E. W. NJ. Mackey,
Thomas R. Small, James f. Green, Thomas j.
Mackey, Phillip NJ. Thorn, David Barrow, G. I.
Cunningham und NJ. II. Collins, respectfully
represent and state to the Court:
That, pursuant to an act entitled san act to
provide for the election of the officers or in
corporated cities and towns in the State OF
South Carolina" passed the 25th day of Sep
tenlber, A. D. 1868, an election was held in
the incorporated City Of Charleston in said
State on the 10th day of November, A. D. 1868.
That on the day succeeding such election,
within the corporate limits of eaid City OF
Charleston. tho several boards of managers of
elections within and for said city met at ten
n,
under cath, cast in said election, stating the
whole number OF votes cast for each candidate
or person voted for, and did transmit their
several reports of the same il sealed envelopes
to the Acting Mayor OF the said city; that said
Mayor did open the reports OF said managers
and announce and publish the whole number
OF votes cast, and the whole number cast for
each candidate 1.-The document then goes on
to state that the Republican candidates for
Mayor and Aldermen mentioning them by
names) received the largest number OF votes
for the respective Offices for which they were
candidates. And that each and all Of said per-
sons, as aforesaid, were duly elected to the
| several and respective Offices aforesaid.
| Your petitioners further represent that the
election OF majority Of the persons voted for
il said election was contested and the man
ayers charged with illegal conduct; whereupon
the returns, together with the ballots, were
examined, and the case investigated by the Act
ing Board OF Aldermen, who thereupon did de-
clare as follows, to wit: 1.-The said board do de-
clare that there has been no legal, valid cleo
tion, and that no persons have been duly elect
ed to the offices OF Mayor and Aldermen Of the
City of Charleston at said election"
Your petitioners further represent that said
Acting Board of Aldermen had no authority in
law to declare that there had been ''ne legal,
valid election, and that no persons had been
Gully elected to the Offices Of Mayor and Alder
men of the City OF Charleston" as aforesaid,
but should have declared upon the returns
aforesaid who had received the highest number
of legal votes, and thereby we're duly elected
to the several offices.
Your petitioners further represent that,on
the 10th day of November, A. D. 1868, your Pc
titioners made formal demand that their cleo
ton be officially declared according to law, and
they be allowed to qualify and enter npon the
| duties OF the said offices, as by law they were
entitled to do. But your petitioners state that
said Acting Board OF Aldermen, disregarding
the just demand Of your petitioners, afterwards,
to wit, on the 18th day OF November, A: D. 1868,
did utterly neglect and refuse, and still do ne
glect and refuse, to declare SAID election, and
allow your petitioners to qualify and enter upon
their said Offices, as by law they ought to have
done, and to do, and as, in fact and IN law,
| they had and have power to do.
And your petitioners further state that they
are entirely without remedy in the promises
unless it be afforded by the lnterposltlon OF
| this Honorable Court, by their writ OF mdndd-
mus, and they therefore pray that writ OF
nqndan.us may issue against the said Acting
| Board Of Aldermen of the said City OF Charles
ton, commanding them to declare said cleo
ton, and allow your petitioners to enter upon
their said several and respective offices, and
| that such other order may be had in the prem
ises as justice may require.
(Slgned) D. H. CHAMBERLAIN,
| D. L. CORBIN,
Attorneys for Petitioners.
This statement is supported by an affidavit
signed by Gilbert Pinsbury, W. r. b. Hampton,
Malcolm Brown, E. W. NJ. Mackey, Joseph r.
Small, James F. Green, Thomas J. Mackey,
Philip NJ. Thorn, David Barrow, G. I. Gun
ningham, NJ. H. Collins, and sworn to before J.
G. Mackey magistrate.
A writ of n,andamus was thereupon issued,
reciting the foregoing petition, and conolud-
ing as follows:
Commanding them to declare said election,
and allow said petitioners to enter upon thel1
seid several and respective offices, or show
cause on Tuesday, the eighth day of December.
A. D. 1868, why they refuse to do So"
The Attorney-General has prepared an appll-
cation for writ Of quo ,oarronto, which con-
tains the same statement of facts as the appli'
cation tor mandamus, and is supported by bis
| own affidavit