New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1874-11-24
THE RETURNING OBAKD.

I the members being present the minutes OF
; Saturday were read and adopted.
Mr.. Arroyo asked for informotion in re-
gard 10 the returns from mDeSo.o parish.
The secretary Of the board informed tha,
body that in compliance with its order he
had addressed - letter to Mr.. B.han, the as
-i-tan: supervisor Of DeSoto parish. a. No
! II Dsy.des .iret. The bearer Of the lett.
was unable 10 fad Mr.. Bchan. but he left the
letter at NJ. l.; Dryades street for him
Upon further inquiry being made about the
returns, supposed 70 be in che hands Of Mr.
BehaE. and ri his wherea bouts. Mr..
| Arroyo SAID that he had been informed tha,
! Mr.. Behan had been arrested by order OF
! United States Commissioner Craig. and
that the returns were in possessio Of tina.
| officer.
Mr.. Cavanac said Mr.. Behan refused 70
! answer.
On motion the board then proceeded 70
consider the protests and pleadings made
in regard I" the returns from polls tive and
seven Of the seventh ward. Before these
! matters were taken up. however, Ms. Ray,
on the part O! Republican counsel before
! the board. read a brief referring in general
terms 10 all contests that may come before
the board. to its powers. etc., to determine
| them. the legality Of the board. etc; all Of
| which is intended to be an ans wey to the
brief filed by Democratic counsel touching
the same points.
On motion Of SIR. Anderson, the brief
submitted by Mr.. Ray was received and
| ordered to be filed.
Mr.. Zac',svic then asked, and was granted
permission 10 read the briet submitted by
Democratic counsel.
In order that the public may have IN op.
pOrtnnity Of thoroughly knowing the ar.u.
ments Of counsel on both sides. together
with the authorities cited by them in sup.
port Of the positions taken by them. we
have concluded to publish both briefs. The
following is the
Argument Of the committee on the part of
the Conservative Democratic party on
the law governing the Returning Board
OF the State of Louisiana.
This board being constituted under a
speca! law OF this State TACT No. 80.
-
StTncl in connection with the &C: q: 1870
in 50 tar - the latter does not conflict witt,
tn. provisions -: the former. State Va.
Wharton. - A., 10. And buth are to be in.
terp,eted and construed with reference to
general principles and laws in j,ari n.ate,iel,
natural vrasnn aud Law. as well as equity.
G. c.. art. IL and II. Elections are admit
tcdy held for the purpose of ascertaining
Fhe will %: the qualified voters in regard to
Al GJ,f1 or Irle.t
object of returning boards is to ascertain
the results, compile the same, and make
proper reports thereof. The action of
such boa'ds il TO be carefully confined to
an examination of the papers before
fore them, and determination of
the result theretrOm in the light of such
facts OF public notoriety connected with the
election as every one takes notice of. and
which may enable them to apply such bal
lots rs are in any respect imperfcc: to the
proper candidates or offices for which they
are intended, provided the intent is sutti
clently indicated bv the ballot in conpec-
tiOn with such facts; SO that extraneous
evidence is not necessary for this purpose
Cooley's Constitutional Limitations, 623,
and thirty cases in the various States there
referred 70. The governing principle in
all cases is to clearly ascertain the intention
Of the vcte.s." State vs.. Steers-Bright.
ley'> contested cases, }03, Such is the gen.
era law in regard to returning boards. In
oar own State the Supreme Court. in inter
preting the present act. said: NO statute
c"nierriug npoE the courts the power to
try cases of contested elections or
title 10 office authorizes them to re.
wise the action Of the Returning
Board. If we were to assume that |
pierogatve. we should have to go still |
lurther and revise the returns of the super
vsors Of elections, examine the right of |
voters to vote, and in short the courts would |
become, in regard to such cases, mere Of |
fees for counting, compiling and reporting
election returns. The Legislature has seen |
proper to lodge the power to decide who !
has or yh" has not been elected in the Re- |
turning Board. II might have conferred |
that power upon the courts. bur it did not. !
Whether the law he good or bad. it is our
duty to obey its ;'-ovisions and not to leeis.
ata." Bonner W Lynch. - Annual, 2O8.
Such being the in expectation, by the highest
judicial au:hoiitt, of the statute, under
which this board i constituted, is the law;
and whether the powers thereby invested
Jt Judicial or ministerial. constitutional or
this is neither the time
nnr the place to investigate. IT sutlices |
hat it is the law.
The question tnen arises how far the pro-
visions Of the law in regard to the returns
I've sac crauenta! and how far directory;
hat is to say, how tar non compliance
With particular forms will lnval!date the
election at sny individual poll. Bearing
n mind the ptinciple that the object OF an
election Is to get the sense OF tha qualified
'oters, and the duty OF y returning boald
o obtain and compile the result of such |
'uteS when east, the following extract from
Jushius'- work On Legislative Assemblies
sections 2GI :1Go and 2o3) will furnish the
'rnciple. il. indeed, it d"es not cover all
he points OF infnrmallty that may arise:
20l. The duties of returning officers in
uuducnug elections being prescribed by |
he statute laws of the several States it is |
obviously impossible to present anything
uOre than the general rule as to how far J
X gect or miscOnception Of duty on their
art will affect the validity of an election;
nd, herein, the leading principle sanctioned
9th by law and common sense, undDubt-
div is this, that where the provisions of
.w Whatever they may be are impera-
ve or prremptory, any neglect Of re-
uining officers to observe them will
ender their proceedings void; but that
here the law is merely directory, G
o neglect or mistake, or even imprOper {
/. fatal. though frequently made punish g
hle by Law il in other respects, there :
rs been substantial and good election.
"i law, which are introduced ! g
my as aiilrnat!ve propositions, are COM | Q
'"nly. III less essential in their character, |
l'-r'ly directory: tut if accompanied also a
y negative words. or their equivalent, r
'"y arr. ot course. without regard to their ! a
I@rscier. aiwdl peremptory. il
~. In the application OF this principle ! 2
uch snbarcas> >ment will be prevented by ! c
eerng IN view these two considerations: t
.rst. That u IL the language, rather than | '
ie nature ~! statutory provision, " hich f