The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1877-04-10

"
to do more than perform its duties, II il refused
to perform them. court is wholly without
power to direct hoto these duties shall be
performed. The mandamus for those reasons
WAS properly refused. Ii s clear to our minds
that The not OF December Is, 1879, establishing
the Superior District Court does not authorize
the eontestipg OF any election not previously au-
thorzsd by law TO be contested. In the structure
Of that part Of the act relating to elections, the
term contest is not used the prominent character
istie expression used ia, rtgtto any office State,
psriHh and municipal . clearly indicating and en-
bracing the intrusion into Office net. As matter
OF contem porRneous history We Judlclalis Know
titles to Offices were about that period issued by
adverse and conflicting powers, each claiming TO
rghtfully WELD the authority Of the State aud to
direct the State goveIpm mt
Commissions in great numbers were thus is
sued and frequent disturbing difficulties arose
from the condctions between different parties
holding commissions for The same Office. Ono
purpose in organizing the Superior District
Court WAS to have these yexed questions rs to
who held the proper commi sion or authority
promptly disposed OF, and to that ehd the aupe-
rior District Court authorized to entertain oil
proceedings and to try al cases or actions ''in
which the right to any Office state, parish or
municipal, is in any way involved"
chiefly ON article 10 OF the State constitution,
which declares g that a courts shall be open,
and every person for injury done him i'll his land,
gooda, person or reputation shall have adequate
|
tered without denial or unreasonable delay"
Let IL be conceded for the argument sake only
that this article OF the constitution embraces the
| controversial disputes growing out OF elections;
that the wrong complained of by the relator is
to be redressed under and by The provisions Of the
article quoted. Then hs is entitled TO an ade-
quate remedy by due process Of law. The article
Of the constitution does rot prescribe this pro.
cess of law that he ID entitled to. Justice shau
be administered without denial or unreasonable
delay.
The article is silent as TO how justice shall be
administt rcd. Yet, in seeking the adequate
| remedy due process of law must be followed,
| justice is to be administered by due process OF
law,
II is for the Legislature TO prescribe the due
process OF law, to establish and define rules un-
der which proceedings to determine which OF two
candidates for State tffice received majority
Of the votes cast throughout the state for that
Office shall be conducted when one OK these san-
didates charges that through error or fraud the
| Returning Board has illegally and wrongfully
returned his competitor duly elected instead OF
the complainant, who insists that he was duly
| and legally elected. The returns made by the
Returning Board are made prtnsd facie evidence
OF their correctness but subject 10 revision. Now
we ire unable to find that the Legislature has
prescribed the process OF law. the rules to be
| followed by the conits. the nodus operandi to be
observed in having the returns Of the Returning
| Board corrected, II erroneous or frauduient. Ihe
courts are open, but IL iB not fJr them TO enact
laws prescribing the manner in which the sction
Of tho Returning Board is to be judciaily Ie-
yised.
! The redress sought for by the relator involves
the contestpg OF yotes. This court, in ths Case
OF the State vs. the Judge OF the Second District
Court (i3th An, p. 30, ANNOUNCED that tue con-
testing of votes Ia not Judicial function, only so
far rs made such by special statute. Indeed,
some have gone 80 far to question whether
this 10 not wholly matter of administration
which cannot with propristy be referred IT, the
HI Ali, all IN ta rla
that such tribunals cannot usurp any great r
control over tpls business than 1s specially inl-
posed upon them by law. In the absence Of u
stat tutory authorization they are without jnristlc-
ton TdtiO7te HhnteFiT."
In the case OF Cohn vs. Knoblock, (25th An
nual, 263,) the same views wure expressed. 1t
WAS there said that 'the adjustment and eon-
pilation OF election returns, determining the
number of legal and illegal votes caat for each
candidate, declaring the result OF an election and
furnishing the successful candidate with the
proper certificate; in short, experimenting and
controlling all the details Of an election belong
primarily and properly to the political depart
lnent of the government"
We no where find that the law-makiDg power
OF the State has referred to judicial actions, con-
tested elections involving an inquiry into all the
details OF an election, except by the act oil 1855,
which, as we have already seen, is special y
restricted to the election OF parish and ward
officers.
The act creating the Returning Board provides
that the returns OF election, thus made and pro-
mulgated shall be prinad facte evidence in all
courts of justice end Before il civil officers auti
set aside after q contest according 10 ba1D.
The contest, then, which involves the rebuttal
OF the prtr,h fdcie evidence OF the correctness OF
the returns of the Returning Board and the re-
opening of the investigation of the election
returns, in order TO determine which OF two OPP
posing candidates is entitled to q given Office, l.
a contest to be made according to law. LIZ tht
law-maker has omitted to enact tho law under
ttfE
, Quoted, it is casats ouissus which the courts
cannot supply.
In civil e vernment rights enforced by rules
and methods having the authority Of law, and
they can be legally enforced in no other way
: The high behes's of the organic law are not al
ways self-enforcing the manner In which ist
commands are TO be obeyed is often LEI
to be provided by the Legislative brancl
of the Government. To this branch o
/ the State government the organic law dole
gates the power to pre'cribe rules ant
principles by which its provisions are to be made
practically useful, and specially so when the or
! ganc law itself is silent on the subject. "thon
such prescribed rules established by law, courts
have no guide by which to pr ceed IN .,ir in
vestigstion of iitigated questions brough before
J them. Proceeding under prescribed ral' in de
termining controversies, the j'dge is su' orizee
! to decide according to equity where thei il ~
. positive law applicable 10 the case; but 6 mus
acquire knowledge OF the merits Of the cass ant
, r. ach conclusions by pursuiag established rule
. for acquiring such knowledge by evldece pre-
sented for his consideration. II is then fallac
, to say that courts can assume to determine con
troversies not referred to them and In relation u
) the investigation Of which there are no estab
r lished rules and principles required by law to b
> followed.
Judgment affirmed.
Do YOU WISH TO BURY PACKARD TEN FEE
, DEEP? PAY YOUR TAXES TO Gov. NICHOLS
DEFICIENCIES.
The Department of Justice $500. .OOl