Semi-weekly south Kentuckian. [volume] (Hopkinsville, Ky.) 1883-1889, 1888-12-14
THE CITY ELECTION.

l
: In county elections the General
Statutes of Kentucky makes the
County Judge, Clerk and Sheriff an
examining or comparing board, and
section 2 Article of chapter 80 di-
rests said officers as board to com
pare the polls, ascertain the correct
uess of the summing up OF the votes
aud give certificates of election TO
those receiving the highest number
Of votes
They are required to compare the
polls and ascertain the correctness of
the summing up of the votes. They
are only minis erial officers (not ju-
dicla) and can only do what the
statute in plain terms directs them to
do and no more.
As City Clerk | am only a minis
terial officer and can only legally do
what in the charter pain terms
| tells me to do. liza law is uncertain
and liable to be construd two ways
a ministerial officer should be very
careful how he acts under it.
The part of the chapter already
quoted does not direct the City Clerk
to compare the poll book, or sum or
add up the votes cast Ike the Gene
raj statutes directs county board to
do.
My opinion is, the charter does not
provide for any comparing or can
wasting board, but simply directs the |
City Clerk to certify whoever the Of |
icer5 of the election say by their GER |
tifcate is elected and theu leaves the
whole matter 10 the City Council to
correct errors.
1t oulY says the City Clerk shall
tilc the book and issue certificates to
the officers elected, therefore there il
10 authority to be found for the City
Clerk TO compare the pol book or
sum or add up any Of the votes or
correct any kind Of mistakes the Of
iicers Of the election may have made,
and whoever the officers of city cleo
ton have certified are elected the
City Clerk must certify aud let all
mistakes and errors 90 before the City
COuncilmen who by the charter Sec
8, Art I are made the Judges OF the
qualifications, election and returns OF a
its memb ers' and thereby made (;
board before whom all Il
questions come up and by whom they !.
are TO be settled. +,
The City Charter, Sec. 9, Art 7, n
provides "ollicers Of city election n
shall be governed in all matters not
with this charter, by the n
avs of this state governing elections n
or State officers" The foregoing n
provision only applies to officers OF h,
iiy elections who are the Judges cI
Jerks and sheriff of the election, and ~
5 the City Clerk is not an officer OF IN
he city election, does not extend to ar
nd include him.
The case of Hammock against a,
iarnes &c, Bush, page 39l, was n,
ase that went TO the Court of Ap. ~,
Gals from Princeton, Ky, over The Al
lection of a town Marshal of Prince. fl,
on at town election and the Courl m
f Appeals of Kentucky in that cast AZ
ecided that the general laws regu. -,
iting examining boards in State aud st
ounty elections don't apply to town IA
lectiOns. ro
BY reference to American decisions az
We W. PaEN 40 Uuh d ~ lldDuH Vi / N
wo cases one decided by the Supreme
,ourt of Illinois and the other OF n,
lichigan as follows "Board of can. i,
assers OF elections are bound to % on
y the certificates Of the judges and mr.
Jerk of the election From which nf
is evident that the general laws OF m
hose states do not as in Kentucky, TO
a canvassing board TO sum h,
r add up The votes on the poll book. mr.
, correct errors in addition and ex. u;
1pt for the provision in the General ve
tatutes OF Kentucky the county co
cards in this state could do nothing 70
ut act on the certificate Of the of Jo
GERS of the election. From tae laws ,h
,ferred to and cited it is at least IN
after Of serious doubt whether or a
Dt the City Charter authorizes the th
ity Clerk TO do anything mere than M
Ike the certificate of the tir
Ulcers of The election and if il A.,
matter of serious doubi in,
} ministerial officer like a City m,
Jerk should presume TO assume
lhority. no
i have given this question as close m,
I'd thorough investigation as the IN
ne allowed me would admit. and an,
e result of that investigation is thai In
10 not believe under the laws the /,
ty Clerk has any legal power OF ha'
thority to correct any mistakes or 600
rors mad by the Officers Of the cleo !
N but Can only take their addition an,
d count as correct, and by reference m,
the poll book find that they ad- II,
d and certified over their official nol
,uatures that pessrs. Campbell. ,c,
Inland, Brown, Hill, Forbes, Dab nj.
y and Radford received the high me-
number ofvOtes and have issued lon
certificate that they have been elect ssi
Councilmen. ,s,
| here is no doubt that officers OF |
} election made mistakes in adj ma
ions and otherwise, but the char. me,
in my opinion provides that those wa
'Ors shall be rectified by other au. res,
)rity than the City Clerk. The
Having given the foregoing rea- knC
ls for my action, now desire t. wb
ude 10 some matters personal to told
self After the polls were closed [ G,
iuihdJ hiknt DCCduSt OI inc pACltpu VIII
,wd in The City Court room, the of. A
Prs of the election repaired TO my nav
Ice where they would not be dis Giro
bed, to count up the vote and citi
lite and sign their certificate. ,sk
The laws did not require them TO tho
alone and because had to wait tiol
Ill they finishing 80 they could [ n,
liver the poll book to me remand |
t not as an Official aud the Sheriff con
d Clerk of the election added up tho
, various columns and the Clerk TO [
ote out certificate aud they signed Nv
as they were leaving a crowd o. unt
rsons was standing outside at my law
ice window eager TO hear the result any
4 as a courtesy to them l raised of /
, window and read to them what the
} officers had figured up den
made no official proclamation mig
j was not then acting in any official llue
,acity but as any private citizen wol
uld have done read to them what v
officers had figured out ica
When the officers finished this or
rk thpy delivarpd tho hook IN No | or |