The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1875-05-29
MATT OR "NATHANIEL. i"

The Montpelier Argus intimates that we
are uncandid in our discussion of the New
Hampshire mattcr-for this is what we
take 1t to mean by its rather strong asser-
ton couched in d word of three letters.
Promising that we cannot understand why
political questions should not be considered
with the same regard for truth as all other
questions, we will, as briefly as possible,
give the reason for the faith which is
within us. Conceding, IL you please
although VIC do not understand 1t to be a
fact that the constitution and laws of New
Hampshire require ''the full christian and
surname of every person voted for" for
state senator to appear on the ballot, we
take it that the action of the democratic
governor and council of New Hampshire
in rejecting the votes for. Matt Head was
none the less illegal, unwarantable, arbi.
trary and unjust. A similar law exists in
Michigan and, under it, an election was
held for Judge of probate, in which
"Henry Higgins" and warner Lake"
were candidates, the certificate of election
being awarded to the latter, votes for
ellen" Higgins being rejected. The Gu
premc court of that state, all the judges
concurring, held that while votes for "H.
l. Higgins" could not be counted for
"Henry I. Higgins yet votes for "Hen
Higgins" ellen j. Higgins" or "Henri
Higgins" could and should be so counted.
Are not the cases parallel
To come little nearer home. In 1873,
the supreme court of that state decided
that the governor and council only had a
ministerial duty to perform, that they
''could not go behind the returns of the
town clerks In the sixth volume of
Grcenleafs reports is decision to the
same effect. We find it quoted In one of
our exchanges, and will use it, italics and
all, as there quoted. 1t will be found on
page 517 of the volume referred to, and is
as follows "The constitution has indeed
"provided that the governor and council
"shall examine the returns of the votes
land summons such as appear to be elect
a. ed to attend and take their seats. But
1.-the examination is merely Jor the puypos'
"of proriding for the organization Of tn
" qorernn,ent By the attendance Of such per
sons as, from the inspection Of tie return'
appear to haze been elected. The COVER
"nor and council nerer presumed upon al
enquiry into the galidity of a senatorial
"elccton, nor could such an inquiry, wert
{" It 10 be instituted by that body, have AM
binding effect" The decisions in nearly
every state in the Union. having simila
constitutional or legal provisions, are t
the same effect, but the cases referred t
seem to us decisive of the question. Pc
l,ically speaking, we should rather rejoic'
at the course pursued by the democratic
governor and council OF New Hampshire
for it gives to the country something Of al
indication OF what may be expected from
restored democracy; but in the interest o
pure politics, and for the honor OF New
England, we have nothing but regrets an
condemnation for such a course. We hes
itated not to condemn the outrageous an
illegal acts of the Louisiana returnin
board, and why should we the similar &C
ton of the governor and council of Ney
Hampshire? If the New Hampshire nc
ton is just, right, legal and proper, the
was that Of Louisiana. They must bot
stand or fall together.