The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1888-02-29

oraer-ous OF the order IN which the objections
made--i will refer TO those sections OF tins
statot- which relate to the sealed bags The
district Judge the trial OF this case. told the
jury as matter OF law that tie inspectors, wnen
they met and organized as the board OF canvass
ers. bad the right TO send 10 the clerk and get
the sealed bags il il became necessary In order
to ascertain the result of the election, and IN sc
ruling IL is argued by counsel that the distrc,
Judge went counter TO what / said in the opin
ION in Coys case In this counsel mistaken.
had no occasion, under that indictment or in
that case. to pass upon that question. nor did
pass upon it. Surely did not intend TO pass
upon it Referring to the papers deposited
with inspectors did use this language; / said
these were important papers because upon ex-
animation of the statutes and the decisions of
tho Indiana Supreme Court il will be found that,
although in contested election cases the ballots.
lists of voters and tally papers sealed up and de-
livered to the county clerk are primary and
conclusive evidence of the result of the election,
the papers deposited with the inspector consti-
tinted the basis upon which rests the official
declaration in the first instance Of the result OF
the elections in the State. / was IN that con-
nection emphasizing what the Legislature had
made the duty of the inspector by showing
what. under the decisions in this State. was the
importance belonging to those papers; that
these outside papers. they are called,
are the papers which In the hrst instance
is the basis of the official declaration
of the result of the elections. SO the Supreme
Court held In 59th Indiana; so doubtless they
would hold now in q similar case; and that the
papers in the sealed bag were primary and con-
elusive evidence of the result of the election.
and so they might become. But made no dec
laration in that case to the authority of the
inspectors to send for the sealed bags while they
were making the canvass. Upon an examina-
ton of that question / am OF opinion that the
district Judge did not misconstrue the law upon
that point, and that his Interpretation OF the
law correct. 1t seems to me 1t Is made al
most self-evident, when you come TO review the
history of those statutes. which 1 have done
upon this hearing In looking at the revision or
1876 upon tue subject of elections 1t viii be
found that when the case in 59th Indiana, and
the in 61st Indiana were decided there was
no such language in the election law as was
placed there in 1881. There was nothing in the
law prior to 1881 that indicated that the In
spector might under any circumstances send
for tine sealed bag and open IL for any purpose.
But in 1881 that law was altered so as TO require
that the second set of papers be put IN sealed
bags as already stated and deposited with the
clerk instead of being kept in the ballot boxes
by the inspectors as before had been required,
and these words were added, which now read:
The clerk shall securely keep said envelopes sealed
with the ballots and papers therein Ill the same condi
ton it was received by him from the inspector IN
his Office unless opened by said inspector, IN the
presence of the board of canvassers, as herein pro-
vided). for the period of six months
Just below that is provision made for tho
board of canvassers to what they shall do
Now why did the Legislature in 1881 add the
words in reference to the sealed bags. unless
opened by said inspector in the presence OF the
board of canyassers as herein provided" unless
the Legislature intended to recognize that there
might be a state of case in which unless that
power was intrusted to inspectors the
will of the people as expressed at the polls
might be defeated, and party driven to
long and tedious contest in order to obtain his
right-and there is no better illustration than IS
afforded in this case. do not say this case, on
ly as it is developed in this large record and
what there appears-and 1 did not understand
upon the argument that the fact was contested
by anybody that sons OF these papers. the out
cid fart
and altered after they were made out When
these papers came before the board of canvassers
it was plainly to be seen that somebody had
tempered with them since they were made The
Legislature doubt put that provision in the
act of 1881, and keeps il there now, because it
did not intend to impose upon the board OF can
vassers the necessity of making certificate OF
the result of an election based upon papers
which they saw upon their face were forged or
mutiated They intended to give inspectors
the power in that state of case, or any proper
case, in order to ascertain the real will OF the
people expressed at the polls, to send to the
clerk. And in sending no harm could come
to anybody. There is the clerk, the custodian
of the sealed bag. There are q large number of
inspectors constituting the board of canvassers
representatives of both political parties, and no
harm can como TO anybody if that sealed bag is
opened in the presence of these represen tesives
OF all political parties, and the clerk and officer
who is the custodian of them; and that was the
only place IN which they could be opened except
in a contested election; they could then be
No tally paper, POLLOCK certificate returned
from any election by the board of Judges thereof
shall be rejected for want of form nor for lack of be-
ing strictly in accordance with the directions herein
contained, If the same be satisfactorily under
stood.
And this was added in 1881:
And such board of canvassers shall in no case re-
jsct the returns from precinct if the same oe
titled by the board of election of that precinct
qured by law, and presented to them by the in.
spector or one of the judges of the board
10 lie "a hat tha hoa Of
having certificate before them and being per-
fectly satisfied, upon the face of it or otherwise,
that that certificate has been tempered with by
somebody, il is idle to say that they are bound
to take that certificate the certificate required
by law It is not the certificate required by
law; but it IS one not required by law, as it
has been changed by somebody. The power be-
longs to the board of eAnvassers to send for the
sealed bag to see exactly what the truth is. and
find out what the ballots establish, what the
people have said at the polls, and give effec. to
that result.
A good deal more might be said npon that
subject, but there must be an end sometime or
other, and leave that question and that part
OF the case with the declaration that In my judg-
ment there is upon the face of this indictment
an offense against the United States; that 1t is
aptly defined In the indictments: that as defined
IL is an offense against the United States which
II was in the power OF Congress to declare. and
that il is an material circumstance on the face
OF this Indictment what WAS the nature OF the
made. A good deal was said in
aNkuiileut ms 10 Tue Oh tHc Sthbo VI
case that court of the United States was asked
10 sit in Judgment upon the alteration OF an
election paper which confessedIy had no rela-
ton to a member of Congress. 1t seems to me
sufficient effects is not given to the fact tnat
1t would be very inconvenient for the
people of any State il Congress were
to take complete control of the election
for Congress and have il at q different time and
at different place from the election held for
officers of the State We have a great many
elections now. probably more than we ought to
have. At any rate, Congress leaves the election
for Congressman to take place at the same
time that other elections of State and local
officers take place. Congress leaves 1t to the
State to provide the mode Of conducting that
election. Do it under your officers. Make such
regulations you choose. All that we mean to
do is TO guard election for Representative or
Delegate to Congress. and. as in the case that
may occur under the election laws of Indiana,
the papers that may be made out contain evil
dence in reference to an election for member of
Congress. as well as for local officers. these
papers become the joint property OF the United
States and OF the State. The provisions for the
punishment of these crimes that may be COM
mitted in reference to the election of Repre-