Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1880-08-22

Did Reeder do Right?
The Law and the Facts.

The Law and the Facts.
Mr.. EDIToR:-My former communion
ton was intended to show the unreasona-
bleness and injustice of too hasty
Judgment in the matter of the contest for
the Office of sheriff of Knox county. It
was based entirely upon the case made in
the newspaper controversy. I had not, at
that time, examined any paper or docu>
ment upon which Mr.. Reeder was required
to pass. Since that time have made some
examinations with few to satisfy myself
more fully, and because I concluded that
my duty as o candid Investigator demand
ed that l should be personally cognizant of
what l wrote, not assuming any facts, or
being Influenced by the outside' and per
sonal matters which have come, with some
bitterness, into the controversy. And
further, could not remain silent without
seeming to yield assent to the position
taken by Democrat" and Jus" who
have directly addressed me through your
paper and the Dispatch. They call for
righteous judgment, such as all the coun-
ters of both parties gave on the day after
election, to-wit that on the face of the re-
turns Anderson has one majority" If the
righteousness of my judgment IS to be de-
come without reference to the reasoning
and facts presented, shall fail of my OBJ
ject. I desire every reader to approach
the subject from O new standpoint, and to
make as strong an effort as l make to be
fair and just. We should leave entirely
behind US any opinions We have formed
from matters which have reached US from
outside and irrelevant sources.
THE LAW AND THE RETURNS.
We are all agreed that the sheriff is
| merely ministerial officer; that he has no
| judicial powers TO correct errors; that he
can not adjudicate upon the validity of the
election or reject q single ballot; THAT the
mental operation of computing the vote and
| the manual act of issuing the certificate
exhaust his powers."
| If, then, the returns were plain, Mr..
Reeder would have had no difficulty in
| performing the duty which the law in, posed
| add figures. It is, then, all important at
| the outset Of our Investigation to deter
mine g@
| WHAT CONSTITUTE THE RETURNS?
1t has been admitted by Mai. Webb that
''the tally. sheets are not by law required
| TO be- certified they are not even
required to be filed with the clerks.p But
Jus" insists that the law "does REQUIRE a
| ,slly-sheet to be kept" that it is part, and
the principal part Ct the returns, and
should control in determining The vote.
Here we see two good democratic lawyers
differing upon the very QUESTION which
Mr.. Reeder had to decide. If he took
Maj. Webbs view the vote could not be
counted as he wanted it counted without
looking behind the returns. If the view of
Jus" was taken the returning officer
would have to ignore the solemn certificate
of sworn officials and correct the figures
In this dilemma he stood, yet it Is said his
duty was plain. ~ rs - 3
Ihave carefully examined the statute
and give briefly such provisions as bear
upon the matter under consideration:
Code Sec 839-When the sheriff is not
incompetent he and his deputies are 1e-
quired to hold all popular elections.
There is no provision which prescribes
the number or how or by whom the
clerks of elections" shall be appointed,
but there is an oath for them and the judges
! and certain duties laid down for them
Sec. $50. The returning officer or his dep
uty (the sheriff or person appointed by him
to hold the eiection) shall receive the ballot
(of the person Offering to vote) in the pres
ence of the judges (Sec. $50
and shall call the name Of the voter in
distinct voice and the clerks of the election