The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1870-07-06
1.-THE CONTESTED ELECTION
EECssION OF 3GDGE GUzE On On "A
PEELFMgaA..Y MOTION.
EVIDENCE OF FRAUD CANNOT
BE ADMiI TED.


Judge Gulgon on yesterday announced
the following decision on the motion of the
complainants (Repub]icanS to strike cut
Gel tain poitions Of the response o, he Pre-.
sent incumbents Of the City Offices:
at haf-past II o. clock the Judge read tss
FH the matter Of complaint against Elgsca
Z Ths s'i; min qsseak IDS far presented jp
tAis .coatest, aaasss one which .Eobusel
lssRost discussed in the able aAdelaAso,
| rate arguments they have submitted, ia,
whether this court, in the matter of contest
kGbe beLEtbns can 60 behind the returns Of the
judges of election to ascertain the cand II
| date for whom alleged llegal voters cast
| their votes. -....... ......l.s... s
OF course if this inquiry cannot be gone
Iuto it would be useless to go into any in
ycstigation Of the qualification of such
| voters. -... .... ... ..
Upon this question but little light is
| thrown in way ofauthority by tie two cases
cited in argument: People Us. Pease, q,
New York. IS and the People ys. Cicote,
1Gth, Mich1gan. 2S3. ...,-....
In the former case tho question was de-
cided by an equally divided bench in the
Supreme Court of New York and by bare
| majority in the Court Of Appeals.
| In the latter case it WAS decided by an
equally divided court 50 that so lar as
these eases, and they are the ONLY allthosi-
! ties which the research Of |. ,un-ei rs cDa-
blcd them to procure, the gene. al question IS
still substantially unadjudic ted. The only
real aid to be derived from them is to be
found in, the Arguments of the learnea
Judges who contended for the maintenance
of their respective opinions. =.
| am therefore to aetern'ne this question
finally, according TO The Constitution and
| laws of the Commonwealth uuaidcd by
dthoritY and without the light of prece-
dent. ....
Cur Constitution provides simply that
call elections shall De by bPVot." This
system, while it is new and unfamiliar to
our people and laws, has been in Use for
wears in many of the States, and is, now
LII almost universal operation.
1t is neither necessary nor proper that |
should express any opinion as to its merit
or dcmerIt: it is enough for me that the
| ballot is the mandate of the Constitution [
| am sworn to obey and enforce !; nor is it ne
ccSsary that should make any clitical ey-
animation Of the meaning or significance Of
| the term itself. No one can ut this day dis
pute that in tho United States it implies 4
secret vote, and legislators and Judges
unite in holding It's object to be to
secure to every voter entire independence
in the eXeiciSe Of his right Of suffrage, a
Ia. .trt freedom from anmadvcrsion OF re-
10; IN and 4 defence against improper III
| ntoaccs. ...... .-......,.-
| on Tie other hand, do not think it can
[ be successfully ontended-altllough able
men and distinguished judges have so ar
GuCd-that this constitutional prescript, ln-
teaded for the protection of the legal and
qualified voter, should be held to restrain
the Legislature from adopting such means
as may be proper, compatible " ith the OBJ
jcct. of secresy TO the lawful voter, to rene
dy the wrong of fraudulent voting. Aud
such means can be easily devised whereby
the serrcsy of the suffrage of the legal voter
could be secured ana ut the same time t. c
rra.'d or mistake OF the illegal voter be en-
p0 ID and corrected, and the wrong done
remcdicd.
The question, therefore, for me to decide
here is whether the Legislature intended
that there should be any investigation be-
lind the ballot. If they did so intend, the
contest must 20 on, however inconN enlent,
expensive, and long delayed it may be. II
thCy did not so inrend, no testimony can
lie received as to the fraud or jllegality of q
vote, no maIrcr how much naud or flC-
s>.tty may I've screened by such determine
zion. ....... ...,.s -..... 49,
IN arriving ut solution of this question
the eases have cited arc of little, If any, as
SiSt t..ilce. ...-. ,.. -......# :
In New York, at the time when the ques-
tions in the case Of People us, Peasc arose,
spectors Of Election, who represent to some
extent our Judges of Election, had 10
power To refuse Il voter who took the re-
uuired oath. In other words. their duty
was merely minister ial. So as to election of
officers IN Michigan. ., - .g-f;.:l :.
In those States, there being no judicial
investigation OF determination Of the
vot Il 8 right to vote before he cast his bal
lot, it was cOntended and held that such
Investigation must afterwards be allowed for
the prevention of feuuG and to secure to
the candidate having the highest number Of
legal votes bis right TO Office, notW ithstand-
III" his opponent may have received the re-
tu, by Illegal and .audp'ent votes. ..
This argument does not apply to the Viz
airia law, in which the Leg stature has
made extended and careful. provision
against either illegal registration or voting.
in the matter OF reg istration our law re-
quires or authoriZes-tirst, the parties
oath, then examination of testimony be-
fore the registrar, the fullest notice TO all
the world of the nume and residence of
tksse registered, ample time for inspection,
| nation, and challenge, and allows tue
largest llbcl.y OF appeal TO aJudge, who is
required to uetermine each case, and whose
deter .nination is final Us to registration.
J. But the law does not stop with this eff
cient shield against fraudulent registration.
| 1t goes on to provide, in case the ,traudu-
lent voter should escape this registration
net when he comes to vote, that 1t is the
duty of the judges and the privilege Of any
elector to challenge his vote on knowledge
or suspicion. .....,..- '.,..- . .l...
The judges musS then explain to the
challenged PAL ty the qualifications OF all
elector," then administer to lin most
searching oath, and even then may abso-
lutely reject bis vote, if satisfied rIom their
own knowledge, or upon legal estimony
adduced before them, t,lat he Is not o legal
voter. n4 r:lW - sl'r .r,Et
+ Here the law, as it now stands, upon lille
gal voting stops, except in the aScel tain-
| ment Of severe penalties for fllsc voting Or
registration, and no where in ibis statute,
wiiichis my only eJide, is this count or any
| other authorized or required, either ex-
pressly or by implication, to interfere with
| the ballot or the voter who casts it save in
the ascertainment and administration, OF
! those criminal penalties it denounees..,
We have thus upon the tace of our statute
as full and complete system for the pre-
vention of fraudulent voting as Legislative
wisdom could devise; unless, Indeed, the
Legislature intended the court to 60 be.
hind the ballot-box to asceItain whether
the voter had light to vote and for whom,
nc voted. -. .a.a.. 4 .s,JstsIfEt- II -
There is no such power expressly given
Is il to BIO got ut by implication I thiBk
not. / am constrainedt to the conclusion by
| the action of the Legislature itself that the