Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1875-06-17
CONTESTED ELECTION CASE.


when John W. Campbell, Conservative, and
K. T. Lucas, Republican, were voted for, was
decided in favor of the latter, by Judge Il. NJ.
Lowe, who rendered the following decision:
Monroe ct AL vs.. Robert T. Lucas. The
questions arising upon the complaint may be
narrowed down to two, the determination OF
which must decide this controversy. They arc
lst. Should extriDsic evidence be received tend
ipg to prove that the three ballots marked Lu-
Gus and the tweuty-tour ballots marked Lucas
were intended to be cast for Robert 1. Lucas.
And 3D. Is the evidence offered sufficient TO
establish such intention.
The law in regard to the lst proposition is
properly stated by Judge Cooley in his work Oh
Constitutional Limitations at page 6l2. That
author says: 1--WE think evidence OF such facts
'as may be called the circumstances surround
''ing the election such as who were tho
candidates brought forward by the noninat-
ling conventions; whether other persons OF
'the same name resided IN the district from
(which the officer was to be chosen, aud If 50
whether they we're eligible or hdi been 7Iuntett
'tor the Office; if a ballot was printed imper-
''fecty; how 1t came to be so printed, and the
like, is admissible for showing that an impcr-
"fect ballot was meant for particular candl-
date, unless the name is so different that 70
thus apply it would be to contradict the bal
slot itself; or unless the ballot is so defective
That it fails to show auy Intention whatever
Tin which cases it is not admissible" 1t Was
contended that the ballots under consideration
were embraced iu the latter class, that is, were
too defective to indicate an Intention, aud the
opinion OF Chief Justice Savage, in'the People
vs. Stevens, iu 5th Hill, was cited in support Of
this position. Its sufficient o say of that opn
ion that 80 far as it affects this question it Was
not only an obiter dictum but an obiter dicIum
of dissenting judge. Aud this question
was expressly waived las not involved IN the
controversy by Judge Bronson, who delivered
the opinion of the court. It was further cOu-
tended that the word Lucas was a generic
or family name that it could not posi-
bly, be understood as referring to partic-
uar Individually and that the only infer
ence which could arise from its being upon
ballot was, that the elcctor did not intend to
vote for any one, Had such been the Intention
it would doubtless have been effected by st1lk-
ing from the printed ballot the name OF the
candidate, or by voting ballot blank as to this
Office caonot conceive that an clcctor would
take the trouble TO write, or have written upon
ballot, the sirnamc Of a candidate for an cthce
if it was his DteutiOn to vote for 90 one Tor that
office | am, therefore, OF opinion that the
ballots under consideration indicate the lnteu-
ton of the electors who cast them to vote for Il
person by the name of Lucas for the Office OF
City Sergeant. And as evidence tending to
show for what particular person by that uame
those ballots were cast would not contradict
them, am further of opinion that evidence
Of "the circumstances surrounding the cleo
ton may be considered for that purpose. In
the brief extract from Cooley on Constitutional
Limitations the facts embraced under the term
circumstances surrounding the election are
The evidence disclosed that theCUnservative and
Republican Nominating Conventions, present.
ed, the former the name Of John W. Campbell,
and the latter that Of Robert /. Lucas, tor the
office Of City Sergeant; that these nominations
were published in the papers and extensively
discussed 10 the community that the contest
was very close and active one, between the
friends of John W. Campbell aud Robert /.
Lucas that Robert T. Lucas was usually adj
dressed and spoken of by his acquaioauces as
"Lucas - that on the sign over the place OF
business of his 6rm, fucker d Lucas, only
bis sirDame Lucas was mentioned that
during the canvass, and on the day OF election,
the appeals made to the electors by the friends
of Robert T. Lucas, in behalf Of their caudi
date, were cote for Latcas )" that there were
six persons in the city Of Alexandra, besides
Robert T. Lucas, by the pame Of Lucas, five
OF whom, viz: David, Uriah, Charles, Walter,
and Albert were colored, and zone Joseph g.,
was white. But it did not appear that either
of these persons was candidate, but on
the contrary, that the general understanding
throughout the community was, that John w.
Campbell and Robert L. Lucas were the only
candidates for this office.
1t was doubtless the knowledge of these
facts, that induced the Judges Of cleo
tiou at each of the precincts to count
these disputed ballots in favor of Robert I.
Lucas. 10 this they have erred. They should
have certified their returns 10 accordance with
the face OF the ballots. 1t was for the courts
and the courts alone, upou evidence properly
before them, to- determine for whom the cleo
tors casting these ballots, without Christian
name or its initial letter, designed they should
be counted This action Of the judges OF cleo
ton at their respective precincts, without con.
ference with the judges of the other precincts,
is not, however, without it's significance. 1t
indicates thorough accordance Of sentiment;
and declares, with almost the force OF tine vcr-
dict of jury, that the twenty seven ballots IN
question were intended by those who voted
them 10 be counted in favor of Robt. L. Lucas.
10 this opinion, cannot hesitate to coucur.
TO deprive Robert It. Lucas, under these cir
cumstanecs, of the certificate which has been
awarded him would be to sacrifice the sub
stance to the shadow; to subordinate the right
OF suffrage to the forms provided for its pro.
,ectioo to ignore The merits Of the cleo,
tiou," and to substitute the will of this court
for the ascertaiued Intention Of the electors. .
The determination Of the court, therefore,
is that Robert L. Lucas was, at the :speela!
election held on the fourth Thursday in May,
to fill vacancy 10 the Office of City Sergeant,
duly elected to fill such vacancy, and is entitled
to the certificate which the commissioners OF
election have awarded him. u,s ~
The case was ably argued by Edmund
Burke for Campbell, and e. & Stuart Tor
Lucas. =. ~,a..'" {
CHEAP EXCURSION TRIPS. In abiding to
the cheap excursion trips of the steamer Mary