The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1882-12-20
CHALMERS =. MANNING.


EDIToRs CLARIoN The people are right
and the Secretary Of State was wrong. The
almost unanimous voice Of the press and
The quite unanimous voice of the people Of
the State who want justice done though the
heavens fall, are as strictly in accord with
the technicaIities Of the law al they are ID
consonance with common sense and common
fairness. For once, the Law and justice are
synonymous. Gen. Chalmers should have
been given the certificate on, at least, two
legal principles 50 plain and clear that they
cannot be mistaken
|. The county commissioners Of election
are required by the Statute to transmit to
the Secretary of State a statement Of the
whole number Of votes given in their eoun-
ty for each candidate voted for in the coun-
ty." This the commissioners Of Tate eoun-
" did in the form and manner usual and
customary 10 this State. They cert. fed to
and signed this statement, which recited
that James R. Chalmers had received 1472
yotss, salI of which viii appear BY tie tally
sheet or the opposite side Of this paper. T"
7 Looking at the so-calltd tally sheet, which
: is in fact a statement of the votes east by
precincts, on the back OF the paper, 14T2
votes are found to be set down to James r.
Chambless aud none to james r. Chalmers.
The commissioners then have decided that
James r. Chalmers is entitled TO the votes
which the ''tally sheet credits TO james R.
Chambless. They were the judges ofths mat
ter, not the Secretary State. He is bound to
accept and give full faith and effect 10 their
? judgment whether it be right or wrong. Il
! wrong, .he person aggrieved by it must seek
his redress in the courts. Any attempt BY
the Sec rotary of State TO reverse the judg
ment which the commissioners may certify
is a usurpation of power. When the Sec
rotary says that because his duties were
purely ministerial he was driven to declare
result which was not borne out by the
facts Of the case, he forgets that in oyerturn-
ing the declaration that the 1472 votes SCI
! down to james R. Chambless were received
:. by james R. Chalmers he exercised judicia
;. functions of the highest order.
@ The law requires the Commissioners tt
send up statement of the whole number
: of votes given for each candidate It say:
e nothing about sending up "tally-sheet'' o
= tabulated statement of the votes by pre-
= cincts. They sent up in this case both
: statement Of the "whole number" of vote
e cast, certified by their signatures, and state
h ment by precincts. Their legal act in send
2 ing up the statement of the "whole mum
! ber' could not be avoided by their un
i authorized or voluntary act in sending VI
If statement by precincts. A fundamenta
Is principle of law is that useful thing i
- never yitiated by a useless one. Utile pc
5, inutile non vitiatur.) The question is no
e as to the suficiency of tabular statemen
,e to answer the requirements OF the statute
I but is, which shall govern, when there is
certificate of the "whole number" and ais
tabular statement with slight variation
, in the name of one of the candidates en-
Il dorsed on the back of it? The exlct ques
" ton in cases almost identical has been de
y cided by the Supreme Court of Wisconsin
e In Attorney General VS.. Barstow, Wis
# 567, the board of county canvassers of sew
G eral counties sent up a statement of tn
- number of votes cast for the several candi
: dates, and sent also tabular statements b,
precincts, (tally-sheets) showing diferen
result. The Supreme Court directed th
u counting of the general statement and tn
u rejection OF the tabular statement, 'be
y cause" as they say, "the tabular statement
# .Oere not authorized By laW and Of course eOyc
" not be epidence Of the facts stated in them
) This case was followed and the principle
re-announced in McDill V. State Canvas
{ sers, SO Wis. 1913. This was a contest owe
{ certificate in an election to Congress
4 The tabular statement of the vote by pre-
cincts was here endorsed on the back of til,
T general statement and was certified to b.
a correct in the face of it-exactly as wa
done in the Tate county matter. The Wis
c0nsin statute was substantially the same al
Y ours. The Supreme Court counted the gen
Y eral statement and rejected the tabula
statement by precincts 1t is impossible
Il to conceive of case more exactly parable
g to the Chalmers and Manning case. 1t wa
a mandamus to compel the issuance of
proper certificate by Secretary of State t
person claiming to have been elected tt
Congress, the jurisdiction of Safe court
in such matters being well settled. LEX.