South Branch intelligencer. [volume] (Romney, Va. [W. Va.]) 1830-1896, 1876-12-22

ference TO the election or 1874, ami said
I'VE are constrained TO declare that the
action OF the Returning Board on the
whole. was arbitrary, unjust and in our
opinion illegal
And in speaking OF this vacancy on
the board. AMI OF the refusal OF the board
TO dill il. they sail further, ..Your com.
nittee think the law as to the constitu.
ton OF the board. was not complied
WITH
Here, then. is the authority Of Re-
publican Committee OF Congress- CON.
posed OF such Republicans as Hoar,
Wheeler. Fry. Foster and Phelps. for
the statement that this board 10 not le-
galiy constituted. No act ofan illegally
constituted board can be legal.
But further. even il the Returning
Board had jurisdiction Of the subject,
and If it lrnd been legally constituted.
yet. their action in throwing out these
votes. would still have been absolutely
void under the law itself and the indis.
putablc facts Of this case.
The law calling into existence this
Returning Board anil defining its powers
is perfectly plain and easily understood.
OhftCk ~, SbC oOafo ott oOudu W S-PunI
and declare the votes actually cast. ex.
cept In the cases and under the circum.
stances specifically set out in the law
itself.
The law devolvcs the very delicate
and dangerous power OF throwing out
votes upon the board, but it is careful
to absolutely prohibit its exercise. ex.
cept in cases, clearly pointed out ia
the law
Before the board can get any right to
consider the question of throwing ont
votes, certain things mast have occurred.
which are clearly set out in the law itself.
Unless they do in fact occur, the board
has absolutely no jurisdiction TO throw
out votes; and any pretendc action,
not based on such prerequisite juris
tional facts, is rs absolutely void rs il
taken by any four people within the
whole limit Of the Unite States.
The law plainly commands the proper
Commissioners and Supervisors OF +
lection 10 make full return. within a
certain specified time. OF the result OF
an election. and to desposit it in the
post office Of their own parish, address.
ed to the Returning Board.
In case it is claimed that any of the
causes enumerated for throwing out
votes exist, these supervisors and com.
missloners must site in detail all sucl.
facts as support such claim, and must
do il on the spot aud within the time
named. and must attach it 10 the returns
themselves, and must also procure cor
roborating state :nents of three witnesses
In hp n'sn ,a1n ,xitl,;r
aud also attached TO the returns. The
acts complained Of must also have DC.
Cured within the time specified in Tie
law.
Every provision Of the law prescrib.
ing every step in the process IS manda
tory and definite. and, unless complied
with, the law does not confer jurisdiction
upoI any human being to pass on the
question OF throwing out votes.
Tie reason is obvious. If there is
really any intimidation or violence on a
particular occasion, Of course the party
charged with supervision is aware Of il
then. AID is not in better position to
know about IL weeks afterwards-after
he is acquainted with the result of the
election in the whole S,atc-of the ne.
portnhity to fit his case to its exigcn
cics. The only time TO take honest &C.
lion is when the law directs. 1t covers
all conceivable honest purposes, for
which such n law can be desired. A
disregard of its provisions, can only
mean nationally. that an afterthougli.
has suggested dishonest use 20 put TIE
machinery to.
As matter of fact, in no single in
stance have these prerequisite jIrisdic.
tiona! steps been taken, and the conse
qucnce - inevitable, that in no single
instance. did the board have any juris
diction or discretionary power to throw
out single vote. This is not a ones
ton oil an obHse OF discretionary power
IL is much simpler. IL mere naked
act Of usurpation. and those four men
sitting in New Orleans had no more
power under any conceivable intcrpre
tation OF the laws Of Louisiana, to throw
out vote, than any four mere intruders
tho conditions precedent to the vest
ing of such power had none OF then
, been complied with.
The Congressional Committee before
/ alluded 10, when referring to similar acts
of the board in 1874. based on prcciscl,
the same pretended grounds, said =
Upon this Statute We are all clearly Of
/ opinion that the Returning Board has
/ no right to do anything except TO can
vass and compile the returns which were
/ lawfully maize 10 them by local officers
/ except in cases where they were accom-
/ panied by the certificates Of the super
+ third section" &c.
In no instance in the present cas-,
4 were they so accompanied
This question, when il comes to bt
more examined, can present no difficult,
either 20 Congress or any other bod.
II is a simple case OF an act absolute
+ J." without jurisdiction on any theory
q naked usurpation and, as such. no