Butte semi-weekly miner. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1886-1890, 1889-10-23
THE Law AND EVIDENCE.

Il
dulges in a colum Of generalities ABOUT
. fraud at the Tunnel precinct and about
. the certificates of good character to
which VIM. M. Jack and Vim. E. Hall
: are entitled in the estimation of that
above-suspicion journal. 1t does not
' quote one line Of law to prove that JACK
and Hall had a legal right to act in a
judicial capacity as members of the
board Of canyassers, and we challenge it
to do SO. That they had no such judicial
right ever il the evidence of fraud had
been incontrOvertible, we again quote
from Judge Knowles decision given
when he was one of the justices of the
supreme court Of this territory. See the
cause of Chumaser VS.. Potts, IL Montana
Reports, page 270, as follows:
Much might be said in relation to the
issues presented ir 'his procedure. There
are a large number OF i.sues tendpret!in the
answers that go to the point that there
was a fraudulent and iilc g6 vote cast upon
the subject of tie approval of the capital
law.
This is a question that the canvassers OF
the return OF the abstracts of the votes had
nothing to do with. 1t was no part Of their
duty to Diet ,rmine what was the true and
legal vote cast. What they were required
to do was to determine what the abstrac cts
of the vote returned to them showed upon
the subject. As they have Mt. right to go
behind these abstracts, they nave no right
to assign as a reason for not canvassing
the true abstracts, that there was an illegal
and fraudulent vote behind them.
If such an ISSUE was allowed to be raised
when the question was whether an election |
| officer should canvass or not election re-
turns, every single one of them, down to the
judges of election, might raise the same
issue, and there would be a clog upon our
whole political system. Officers whose
duty by law is to canvass returns have no
other legal duties han these to perform,
and as it would not be within the province
of the proceedings in %mandamus to compel
them to 60 behind the returns and deter
mine the actual legal vote cast, SO they
cannot set up what in law does not con-
Germ them, as officers, as a defense when
they are required to do what does concern
them, as officers. under the provisions of
law.
When the Inter Mountain shall cease
to indulge in meaningless generalites
and shall quote some better authority
than itself to sustain a legal PROPOSE
ton it will be entitled to a hearing, but
not before. The Democracy of this ter
ritory has contended from the first that ]
the question Of fraud should be passed
upon by a duly constituted court Of law, {
and not by any two men whose lack of ,
judicial experience units them for such j
sphere, admitting them to be honest, =
and especially as any other proceeding =
would be in direct violation Of law. +
What right had Jack and Hall to con- t
themselves a court of law? And
The fact that they did SO proves, if it
proves anything, that there was no evil :,
lence of fraud at the Tunnel, for which o
:eason they were afrail to leave the mat o
Ter to the determination of a duly con- Fl
court. If fraud was committed, y
What had the Republican party to lose e,
y submitting the matter to such a 9,
'ourt. Some of the Republican leaders
lecided to steal the legislature of Mon L
ana, and they knew that no court to u
which they might appeal would permit v,
hem to do it, and hence they laid some il
hing at the feet of Jack and Hall which n;
endered them insensible to every consid- u
ration which entities a man to the re- VI
pect Of his fellow-man. The character b,
much Of the evidence produced to fl
how fraud at the Tunnel has been fully OF
hown in the Democratic press of this CT
and so fraudulent was it upon d.
he face of it that there are probably "
o two men in Montana outside of the tn
cell except VIM. M. Jack and ju
E. Hall, that would accept it Oh
as evidence to convict y.
'me of the men who introduced it.
ct only was much Of the evidence of
lat character because Henry Bernard,
lie murderer, was the man who procured Sill
and vouched for it, and because of its to
Ing
lherent evidences Of fraud, but also be- cid
Iuse it was refuted by the counter afi- UNI
avits of reputable men, who are also col
VIII
But Jack and Hall were
lder conctract to do what they I
d, and, as Mr.. Jack remarked, they pro- Co,
sed to do 1t should the heavens fall. ter
his
did not review the evidence nor iro
esent a single reason to justify their h bea
t, which is an admission that none Jat
-, ing
uld be given to relieve them from the In
bile disgrace which they were sure ppo ~,
'uld be visited upon them. In sustain v
3 Jack and Hall, the Inter Mountain
Vers its standard for truth, honesty III
vas
d fairness, and in doing SO, it is with tho
t the support Of the honest element Of erci
fur
own party. The
and
Tho nnbI;o +;oko+ or 1oso ro,r to
wv "Uo 10 Joui the
|, mace the Tunnel precinct unanl- irrcs
usly Democratic. The men who en- any