The new dominion. [volume] (Morgantown, W. Va.) 1876-1904, 1889-02-23

4
The parties who are making TIN
most noise are those who know tn
least about it, and who never looked
into it further than be able TO max
some general allegations Of franc
against their candidate.
We venture to assume that Will
the law IL not without defects, ant
it would be difficult, if not impracti
cable (for reasons to be named) {,
follow it literally in the pending con
test, yet one party will appear abou
AZ eager as the other to take advan
tage of its weak places, and one hal
been a. guilty as the other in tn,
departures from a strict construc
ton.
The chief ground Of complaint re
lates to the manner Of opening and
publishing the returns by the Speak
err of the House. The plain provision
of the Constitution is that he shall
do this Immediately after the or
ganization of the House and before
proceeding to business
Now, this provision of the Consti.
tuition was not strictly followed. foi
three reasons: the first, because the
Republicans prevented it by refusing
to organize the Senate for two weeks
the second, because the Democrats
refused to follow the literal require
ments of the law in the Joint As
sembly; and the third reason is be-
cause an amendment to the constitu-
ton changing the date of the cleo
ton has made it impracticable to
follow the literal requirement in the
case in question.
The Republicans, therefore, were
the first to obstruct and defeat the
requirement for an immediate open
ing and publication; the Democrats
then determined to postpone the pub
LEGATION still longer because of the
contest over the validity of the re-
turns. In our opinion, If the Demo
Gratis have erred in this regard, it
was in not opening and publishing
the returns in those counties where
the returns were not attacked; al
though this would have been only a
more technical compliance with the
law and would not have affected the
general result. If it was proper to
reject, or postpone the publication
of the returns from any one county
land it was unquestionably right in
the case of Kanawha, at least-then
there was nothing to be gained by
making part publication.
Suppose, for example, that the
Joint Assembly had gone forward
with the publication of the returns
from the several counties until they
reached Webster, and that then, as was
the case-they had discovered that
those returns were incomplete; that
the vote for Attorney General was
omitted. Would it have been right
and lawful for the Assembly, never
theless, to say that the constitution
requires publication Immediately
after the organization of the House"
and therefore this publication cannot
be postponed, and the returns al
though evidently incorrect, must now
be published, and the Attorney Gen
eral who was defeated at the polls
must be declared elected, by the
Joint Assembly?
Does the constitution make ma
chine of the Joint Assembly-which
is the court of last resort-and com
pei it to publish what it knows to
be lie-what it knows is not the
voice of the people as expressed at
the polls?
The strictest constructionist will
hardly advocate such position. But
if it was right to postpone, and if
the Joint Assembly has discretion
to postpone, publication in the case
of'Webster, will it not have the dis
erection where the returns of several
counties are regularly contested I'M
der the forms of law-as in the case
of the Governorship? Is the Joint
Assembly mere ministerial body,
established to simply count and
publish; or is it not, in fact, the ju-
dicial tribunal which is to try and
determine what returns are le-
gal and what illegal? If then, as
all admit, it is court, with judicial
powers, by what kind of reasoning,
must it be compelled in the first in
stance to announce a judgment that
is challenged in advance, and then
go to work to reverse itself, or, at
least, inquire whetherit has not COM
mitted an error Of which it was fore
warned? Do not all courts hear the
evidence before pronouncing judy
ment, or do they pronounce judy
ment, and then hear the evidence
which?
If, then, the Assembly, in the exer-
else of its jurisdiction as judicial
tribunal, postpones publication of the
result, and is unable to ascertain
conclusively who has been elected
until after the 4th of March, there
is no publication until after the date
when one Of the two candidates
would have taken his seat if the re-
suit were ascertained.
But no man can assume to be Gov
ernor until the Joint Assembly has
declared his election. No man can
assume to be elected until the off
cial returns have been published by
the Joint Assembly. No man can