, 1874-11-13

Drew. ME: Dookwlsh thon ahswet 6 rrutu-
,,Tno.i,o Dn he na,a ho csae vse now to tho
ospp wond dagg9ss ag mia bs Mo s%e HeF tho
- to whore tho ros'aopeo OF .wo| d. was Of.
tho day Of election. On the ono llai,u; ,ttnoaHon
swoto that Mr. Dlaloly did not rosafie in tho
rlfsE sna u, mfoci1et ot Of tho Twontioth Ward;
board appointed him judge, supnoslng 5 ho
"aa eucli resident, nutiuE upon the iiostion and
aa1nusganR TINT lio was u voter Of tho precinct.
n,,a, n,iu nr naoly himself sworo positively and un-
resnot f9r tnas he ha ooen 90 e!soso of tint
waa not appointed by tho County Boarti, but waa
CHOSEN u, n " tho other 3udgoa OF tho SECOND Pro
s'not 1n @ Esanston: 11o had resided ttoro-.
9;1n ; alupiMIh9s Mona,,;i u tonod In tho affidavit
Judge DectWllh--r0ully HwnnrH both wayA.
blr Spinkh brother says 10 has rcetdol with Ills
mother, THAT ho laa Ilo other homo or pjaco Of
residence anl al the ne'ghbors nay tho saIno or
fop' 'nSnS aawto VIE 80 1Soun ard oor sloo
WHO said for MIR. Trunbull that o'1e 3o
did object, but for us that ho did not, Tic
speaker next urged that tho i}oard was moi n
Ing nearly tho sa'uo GROUND which Mi. swctt
went over, but strengthening hiB position by
citing ntl1taonal authorities, Ills conclusion boiny
that. whateser might bo tho rulo with regard to
throwing out the returns, by roaHon Of inogi-
blIity Of ono or moro Of tho judgee, tho Board
should not undertake to paas upon to question.
l1e insisted thae the iueligibilny OF tho iulgos,
II such woro tho fact, WIS no reason for retect-
Ing sho RETURNS, and that tho Boarss could not 70
into tho trial Of question Of fact. What lilo
tas a'a rf Ssf' tho saproms ap "'a cor ffs''ey y
Illinois said was their duty--haylng aycertainod
TINT tho letnrnH Mcro nat1e, 10 propara m
abstract OF thom and certify them, leaYing all
having authority to inquire into thcn, to tho onl
that orn1ry cltzot might receive justice, md be
protected in his rights
In closing, Juago Trnmbnll called attention
to the TACT that tho gentleman Oh the olher side
AN INCONSISTENCY.
llo had atartod out by tlonyiug nltogotlov the
ruwor Of tho Board to tnke cOr1,txnncp Of u,1eb-
sions Of fast, but Ind endod BY admitting thojr
power to thus discriminate III cases OF forged re-
any gomblAnco Of authority. In making this nd
mission, they had practically conceded ali tint 1o
WAS consel,dlng tor. How could the CanyaHsing
Board detormine whether or not returns wero
forged 'in'esa they took evidence as to tile fact
How could thoy know whether judges Of CLOG
ton acted without eemb1anco or pretenso Of
authority. unlosa they took evidence ?
Tho position taken by Judge Dcctwith,
that tho Board had not tie power to
administer IN oath or takc Testimony,
authorized Juaticoa Of tho Pence, iu any matter
coullng before them for settten1otlt, to admiuis-
tor all onth il necessary to ouablo tnem to deter
nino tho question at issuo as to the attempt
sarily DO voter III tho precinct in which be was
appointed to act the speaker characterized Il as
avosy lame and faulty construction Of tho stat
ute, which expressly provided that q jndge Of
election nl1las ho m oloctor. aud plainly defined
an eloctor as citizen who had resided In the
Slate, county, md precinct tho requisite tno
next preceding thu election. There could be no
otlor reasonable and Intelligent meaning attached
to tile language Of tho statute than that Judge
or election must be an elector In the preciuct iu
Which lc was appointed and served.
THE COUNTY CLEHK
said, ns thore were great mnnv returns yet to
bn corrected by tho judges and sigued bY The
clerks. and tho cauyass could not DO completed
that day, tho nonrd had decided to defer t}lejt
decision AZ to the reception or rejection Of tho
votes Of tho precincts in question until IL O'Clock
this morning.
Tho Board then adjourned.