Wood River times. [volume] (Hailey, Idaho) 1882-1915, 1882-11-21
THE DUTIES OF BOARDS OF CAN.
WASHERS.

the returns OF Nalad and Junction
precincts was before the Board OF
Canvassers, last Saturday, i.ycurgns
Vineyard took the bold ground that
the Democratic party had never held
as radical opinions, regarding the du-
ties Of canvassing boards, as the Re-
publican party. This provoked cx-
carnations Of dissent FROM tie Re
publicans present. But Mr.. Vine
yard was not speaking for the benefit
Of the Republicans. lie was simply
ecndeayoring to infuse sufficient back
hone into tie Democratic members OF
the Board to cause them to rerpetrate
fraud by carrying out the pro-
gramme previously agreed upon. In
this Mr.. Vineyard succeeded, as the
action of the Board shows. But he
nevertheless placed himself in opposi-
ton to the generally accepted notions
of the powers Of the Board.
A case at hand supports this propo-
sition. In Montana the situation was
precisely similar,at the last election, to
that in Idaho. Several thousand la
borers employed on the Northern
Pacific Railroad voted at the election.
but they voted the Democratic ticket.
Immediately the cry Of fraud was
raised by the Republicans, and it be-
came evident that the Board Of Cam
vassers would be asked to refuse to
count the returns from the railroad
precincts. The subject was at once
taken up by the press, the majority of
the newspapers taking the ground
that the duties Of the Boards Of Can
vassers were ministerial and not iu-
d:cial, that such boards had no right
to inquire into the legality Of the
votes polled, and that they must con-
fine themselves strictly TO the count
ing of the votes returned by the Boards
of Election. The Butte Miner, the
leading Democratic paper of Montana,
was especially pronounced on the sub
ject, and eondem aed the proposed ac-
ton of the Board in strong terms
Here are few extracts from one OF
its articles:
1t is whispered that the Territorial
Canyassing Board, of which the can
didate on the head Of the Republican
ticket was member, will throw out
the vote of certain localities, and
thereby thwart the will of the people
A long line of decisions on this point
is against any such usurpatien of au-
thority. If CanYassing Boards can
receive and reject such returns as may
suit them, there is, then, no need Of
the formality of an election-tke
Board might as well determine in adj
vance whom they prefer without sub
jecting the people to the bother OF
going through the forms of an cleo
ton. The law is absolute that the
duties of Canvassing Boards are adj
and not judicial. :
Another matter Of some local inter
est is the rumor that one precinct of
this county will be thrown out. II
street drivel amounts to anything this
might occur; but, fortunatel y the mat
ter is in the hands of officials who will
be governed by the law and the de-
cisions in similar cases. The law is
that no irregularities, except where
fraud and collision are shown, can
vitiate an election. II this were not
SO, few designing men in precincts
they are satisfied will give an adverse
vote, could disfranchise the entire yot-
ing population of such precinct. The
five men picked up IN each precinct
to constitute an election Board can
not be supposed to be learned in the
law and Judicial decisions. They do
the best they can to ascertain, record
and return the will of the people
whose suffrages they are appointed to
receive. The citizens WHO come be-
lore them and deposit their ballots in
good faith are not to be deprived of
their voice in public affairs BY any
bubbles or political subterfuges. The
light of suffrage is sovereign right. !
but fraud can vitiate an cleo
ion, and THE ONLY TRIBUNAL
o determine sach a question, with
'afety to popular rights and the per-
'etuity OF free institutions, is a judi
'ial tribunal. A canvassing board |
- NO SUCH POWERS The bal
ots are not even sent up to them.
HE ONLY POWER they seem to