The daily Cairo bulletin. (Cairo, Ill.) 1878-1???, 1880-03-27
Opinion by Mr.. Chief Justice Walker

Opinion by Mr.. Chief Justice Walker.
An election was held in the city of Cairo
on the 10Th day of April, 1879, for alder
men and other city officers. The parties to
this controversy were opposing candidates
for alderman in the second ward Of the city.
When the votes were canvassed on the
18th day Of the month by the city council,
appellant was declared duly elected. The
city was, at the time, organized under the
general incorporation act, governing cities
and villages and towns. Appellee filed a
petition in the county court to contest the
election and charged that Linegar did not
receive a majority Of the legal votes cast in
the ward at the election, and that petitioner
did receive majority Of the legal votes so
cast for alderman in that ward. That there
was number of votes counted for Linegar
which were not cast for him, and twenty
votes were counted Tor him which were
cast by persons not legally entitled to vote
at that election in that ward, and that Lin
egar had not paid portion Of his taxes
when he qualified as an alderman.
Appellant demurred to the petition on the
ground that the county court had no iuris-
diction to hear or determine the contest
but that it belonged to the city council,
which has the sole jurisdiction of such con-
tests. The court overrulcd the demurrer
and defendent thereupon answered. A
trial was had and the court found and de-
creed that Linegar did not receive the ma
jority Of all the legal votes cast at the cleo
tion and that petitioner did receive ma
jority Of all legal votes cast in that ward at
the election, Defendant thereupon ap
pealed and has assigned various errors on
the record, the first of which is overruling
his demurrer to appellee's petition. And
this assignment Of error raises the question
of whether the county court had iurisdic.
ton OF the subject matter of this contest.
In the view we take OF the case this is the
only question we deem important to con
sider. The manner Of contesting elections
is prescribed alone by statute. The iuris.
diction, the mode Of trial and the whole
contest is purely statutory and is not regu.
lated or governed by the common law. AT
the common law il was not judicial pro.
ceeding except in a proceeding in the ma.
ture OF a quo warranto in which evidence
was heard, and the court determined
whether the defendant was entitled to the
Office, if il was found be was usurper he
was ousted, but It was only by such a pro.
ceedlng that the courts interfered in such
contests. We are therefore TO look TO the
statute, to ascertain where il has lodged the
power to try the contest of an election OF
an alderman to a city council. The zen.
eral assembly has conferred jurisdiction on
the county court in cases Of contested cleo.
tons, after providing for the contest Oh
various officers by other courts, by the 9etl
section Of the election law. 1t provide,
that "rhe county court shall hear and de-
termine contests of election Of all county
township and precinct officers, and all
other officers tor the contesting Of who's,
election no provision is made"
The city Of Cairo is incorporated ant
acting under the chapter entitled "Cities
towns and villages" and must be governed
by its provisions. The thirty fourth sec.
ton Of that act provides that: "The CITY
council shall be judge of the election ant
qualification Of its own members" Now
what does this language import
Most assuredly that in any contest between