The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1880-01-08
Gov. Garcelon and the Supreme Court.

Gov. Garcelon and the Supreme Court
[From the New York TIMES, JAM, 4th.l
On the evening OF New Years Day, aser
les OF questions were submitted by Gov
GARCELCN to the ChiefsJustice of the SUI
preme Court OF Maine. These questions
did not cover the ground indicated by Sena
tor MORRILL,. nor were they such as, in thu
estimation of Republicans, were needed tt
decide whether the Governor or his oppo
nents were in the right in their interpreta
ton OF the Election laws of the State. II
was, moreover, announced when the Ques
tions were submitted that they were SC
framed as to extract answers favorable to
the Governor and his abettors, and that
whatever was the verdict Of the court, IL
would have no effect upon the result. On
Friday the seven Justices constituting the
Supreme Court Of the State assembled, and
their answers to the questions submitted to
them were rendered yesterday. Ingenious
as may have been the pettifogging by which
the Governor and his advisers attempted to
obscure the true issue raised by the Maine
conspirators. the opinion of the court is a
sweeping condemnation OF their course, and
q most emphatic Endorsement of the position
sustained by the Republicans. The conspir.
acy may be carried out in spite of the opin.
ion, but, II 1t is, no more clearly revolution
airy act will have been perpetrated since the
firing upon Sumpter, and no more damning
accusation can be preferred against the
Democratic Party than that they have app
proved an assault on the very citadel OF free
dom, with as callous defiance Of the re-
quirements OF equity as OF the principles OF
law.
Divested Of evasions and snbterfuges, the
questions submitted to the Supreme Court,
and, briefly stated. the answers returned to
these, are as follows: l. Can the Gov
ernor and Council order new election OF
a Representative, or can the House of Rep
resentives admit member without return
being made to the Secretary of the State
The Governor and Council cannot order a
a new election, and the House can admit a
member who appears to have been cleo ted
in fact, though not formally returned. IA
Representative is not to be deprived Of his
rights because municipal officers have neg
iecced their duty" 2. Can the Governor
and Council regard the statutes OF 1877 as In
harmony with the provisions OF the Constf-
tuition which direct an adherence to certain
prescribed forms by which the legality Of
the election OF Representatives to the Legis-
Council not only may, but must, be guided
by the statute, inasmuch as its obvious pur-
pose is to carry out the intent of the Consti-
tuition which is, while preserving so far as
possible the regularity of the returns, to
prevent the notification of the popular
choice by any mere errors OF form. About
the constitulionality Of that part, OF the sta
tute which directs that the results of an
election shall be declared in accordance with
the facts, there can be no question. 8. Can
return be invalidated in default of it's
signature by majority OF the legal number
of Selectmen Of town or the Aldermen Of
city? No, because a majority OF the legal
minimum Of Selectmen or Aldermen consti-
tutes quorum, and the signatures OF ma
jority OF such quorum make legal return.
A return signed by two Selectmen or three
Aldermen may, therefore, be valid. 4 and 5.
Can returns be invalidated by formal irregu-
larities on part Of City Aldermen or by the
lack of the official attestation of Town or
City Clerk? No, because the law seeks to
conserve the substance, not the mere form.
The general conclusion to be drawn from
city returns Is that to be adopted, and the
attestation Of clerk pro tenspore is good ia
the absence of the regular officer. The
Governor and Council have no right to 90
behind the returns. 6. Can returns be re-
jected which were not made, signed, and
sealed up in an open town meeting? The
Governor and Council can act only on the
returns forwarded by the Secretary OF State.
They cannot receive evidence to negative
facts therein set forth. Z. Suppose return is
signed by but two Selectmen, and it appears
that there were at the time of meeting at
which the election was held but two Select
men Of that town, would the return be valid
Fharn ra rio,o fr1a IN loo which vuo, IN
render such return legal, but the plain du-
ty OF the Governor and Council
is to be governed by the returns.
They can have no official knowl-
edge of the number of Selectmen who sign
such returns. s. Would the fact OF Select
man being an alien invaldate return
Decidedly not. 8 and 10, Can the Governor
and Council make what they may consider
to be a distinguishing mark'' on ballot
ground for its rejection, and are dots placed
under figures, signlfying an equality of votes
in the same return, to be accepted as ev.
dence Of such equality? The town officers
are the judges OF the admissibility of bal.
lot; when 1t has been received into the bal
lot box it must be counted, and the Govern
or and Council can take no cognizance of
its external form. So. also, In dealing with
returns, their obvious intent is to be consid-
cred, not their form. IL. Can the Governor
and Council decide as to the kind OF evidence
they will receive to enable them to deter
mine the genuiDeness ofthe returns required
by the constitution? The genuineness OF
tho signatures affixed to the returns must
be questioned and proper notice given to all
the parties interested before the Gov
ernor and Council can take evidence
tending to invaliGate them. When these
preliminaries have been complied with,
their action should be guided by well estab-
lisbed rules. IL. How are the Governor and
Council to decide between two lists of voters,
regular in form, but differing In the number
Of votes returned as cast for the same per-
son? Accept the return first received by
the Secretary of State, and if defective or
not true copy OF the record, let it be cor
rected in accordance with the provisions OF
the statute for such cases made and proyi-
ded.
The Supreme Court has thus swept away
the entire fabric Of quibbling, usurpation,
and fraudulent pretense which Gov. Garce-
lon and his associates have erected with such
initiate pains, and with so cynical disre-
gard for all that passes for honor or fair
dealing among the mass Of American citi-
zens. That the men who are left among
the ruins of this edfice OF fraud are capable
Of filling the role of the desperate as they