The Somerset herald. [volume] (Somerset, Pa.) 1870-1936, 1874-12-23
opl e lie e. esn; ssssm siss: 9. M Sour.

electors of the Thlris-s'xiI. Senatorial hi.
trict, complaining OF an undue election an
ialse return Of Enoch ID. Yutzy as Senaio,
G supported by The aiiidayiis al five Of IN
petitioners. Of The truth of the facts state,
+, in the petition. was presented to the Pres
: ident Judge at Chambers. in vacation. oi
the LIST OF Dec. inst, who t%ItereupOn fxe,
the 18th day Of Dec. inst, at : O'Clock P
NJ (being the time 10 which the regula
November term oftbe Court of Common
t Pleas OF Somerset County stood adj0arne,
Tor an Argument Court as the day 20.
The hearing in open court ofthe complaint
and directed notice thereof To be given L
Enoch ID. Iu,zy. at least ten 6ays befor,
the day of hearing.
On the day fixed for the hearing. tht
parties with their counsel appearedin oper
court and requested an adjournment until
the next day, at which time. the defend.
ant having filed his answer under oath.
the court proceeded 10 hearing and the
determination Oh the case.
Three witnesses were produced affirm.
ed and examined, on the part Of the petit
TONERS. The defendant declined to con
sumo the time of the court by an examina-
ton of his witnesses s.
The regularly elected board Of election
officers OF Milford Township, Somerset
County, was composed Of Daniel d. Mil
Ter. judge, j. G. Schaff, majority inspector.
and Abraham Barrone, minority inspector.
The plaintiffs allege that at the general
election on the Oil of November ultimo
Miller and Schaf. some time between
seven and eight O'Clock A. NJ, appointed
a Mr.. Bittner inspector in the place of Bar
rome, and that Bittner appointed his clerk.
Thai soan amer BitineF aud his clerk were
sworn in, Barrone and his cieIk appeared
and demanded 10 he sworn in, aud that
this was refused. and the election was held
by the board thus illegally constituted.
In point of tact, the testimony Of the
witnesses tor the plaintiffs establishes that
the board was not organized until half
past eight O'clOck-an hour and a half after
the time fixed by law for the opening Of the
polls. and the vacancy in Tie board caused
by the abscnGe or the minority inspector.
Barrone, was filed by the unanimous con-
sent Of all the qualified electors then pres
Ont at the polls,
II, therefore. seems that the board was
legally constituted. and that Bittner was
dc jure the inspector but if tils were not
so, If he were only inspector ae facto, and
performed the duties of his Office under
claim and color of an appointment.
yet without any fraud or mistake affecting
the result Of the election. mere i~rregulGrity
OF illegaliiy in the method OF his appoint
ment oF lection ought not TO inyalidate
the vote OF the township. The people OF.
q township are not to be disiranchised be-
cause of the illegal conduct OF the election I
officers. II this were allowed. it would
open wide a door for the entrance of fraud
in a new form. II would enable unprinci-
pied partiSans to defeat an honest majority
by Indirect means. Il might be much the
cheapest way to traudulently carry an cleo
ton. By ioisting an inspector ir~regularlv
into q board, In q township likely to give a
large majority 10 the opposing candidate.
Doubtless when the proceedings of an
are so furnished by the illegal OF
fraudulent conduct OF the officers that the
are uninteliigible, or the election
unreliable, the court may throw out the en-
vote of the township. But in this case
is no evidence Of actual fraud-not a
The whole case rests on tie al.
eyed iilegality o! tho appointment Of the
inspector. 1t was not even alleged in the
argument that a single unqualified voter
q ballot IN Milford Township at that
election, nor that a single qualified elecior
deprived Of his vote. For augbt that
the election was as strictly honest
and fair with Bittner as inspector as L /
have been with Barroae
The WhQlB una and substance Of the
case, as developed BY the evidence and the
argument ofeounsel. is that both Of the in
are Of one political party. But
how could this have been avoided. II there
no electors of the other party present
Il the polls?
there was no %precoDceTt pf aeiidn To
Keep BafrQEe out nOF TO put Bittner in.
IN eiectoF named Shaliis was there want
ng 10 vote and threatening a prosecution {
f the board did not organize by eight
''clock. Miller and Schaff sent for Fran
is Walker, an electo- OF the minority
and requested that he come and act
IS inspector. lie declined because bs
lad killed a beef spd the care OF The meat {
te1aaaded hts time. They then. elected
iittneT, the only other qualified electnr I
lesides themselves and their clerk then nj I
he polls. The whole proceeding was in I
good faith. I
The absence of BarrOne was unPxpccted i
he Presence of Bittner was merely casual.
hey had waited until half past eight c
clock. Shallis was anxious to vote y
nd was demanding an organization of the c
Gard. More than the hour provided for ! Q
) the law had elapsed. Bittnef was the I
My qualified electOr at or near the polls. +
lie was elected inspector by the only quail l
ed voters besides himself there present. L
The learned counsel who argued the
ase for the plaintiffs claims that this elee Q
on OF Bittner by the other iwG should ?
ave been by ballet that Article VIII, r
4, Ot the Constitution Of 1873, re- X
uiFes that sail elections by the citizens ,
nall be by ballot, and we are gravelv
sked 10 disfranchise the honest voters Of 5
lilford township en- masse because the
lree electors did not 90 through a formal .
ote by ballot. The same section Of the
constitution requires that the ballots sha!
e numbered and 8 list Of y0iars shall be ,
ept. These requirements arc as obliga-
ny in an election to which they apply as :
10 other. Il is very manifest that thew do "a
Vi apply at all to the occasion OF filing B
vacancy in the election board by a vote q.
the electors present. d
To call this matter a usurpatiOn-a seiz-
lg by force and without right-Of the Of
of inspector, is a ~perversion of Ian =
1t would be a moastrous mockery Of jus
ce to defeat the expression Of the popular
i'll AM reject the poll of Milford Town al
Zip on any such grounds. i
We, therefore, decide that Enoch d. B
utZy received the Creates number Of le- %
7 vote ~rT - arYaficl IN sba r.r4sHorFn
election.
In regard to the costs ofthis proceeding, :
Ie statute OF the 18Th OF May, 1874. sec. [
provides that the court shall decide i
neither the complaint was without prob 4,
lie cause, and ifso, the petitioners shall be m
able therefor otherwise. the costs are to b.
paid by the Senatorial District. -
Probable cause is defined to be reasOna- mi
e ground Tor suspicion, supported by siI
rcumstanees such as would induce belief
the mind Oia CAUTIONS man. Chapman vs..
older; , Harris. 500 p.
The statement made by Mr., Sehe,l. that Z
fore moving in this matter be required :,
C affidavit Of Jacob Walker to the alleged Of
It that the election OF BittneT as inspec- ~,
r was before the hour OF : O'Clock. and an
the affidavit was ShOTH to the petition gi'
; as well rs the earnesiness with which -
pressed his view of the law that such oSc
sEal appointment OF an inspector, Of itseJ
d uithout fraud. would make void the
poll of the township, indicate that
. e%omplainaBts supposed they had cause
institute the proceeding. and acted with
air show Of caution.
II is therefore adjudged that the cost,
al be paid by the counties of the Sena