The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1892-12-13
THE BOX ELDER CASE.
Arguments for and Against the
Mandamus In the Supreme
Court
The Lawyers Took ALI Day Yes
terday and Will Conclude
To-day.
Blanchard, the Torger, Arraigned In Court
Med q ne. tho Crow Indian,
Acquitted.

The supreme court room was we'll hlied
Yesterday morning 10 hear the arguments i'll
the Box Elder precinct CAGE. Before tho al
torneys opened. Chief Juatico Blake said he
supposed tho attorneys on both sides would
admit the faot that Hamilton had a certifi-
cate of election, issued by the Choteau can
wasting board. II this was done. said tho
Justice, the argument need not be directed
TO that point. The lawyers on both sides
agreeing, the case was then proceeded with.
Judge Tattan spoke first for the canvassinR
board, but he announced TINT he would touch
on but one point in the demurrer he had
filed on behalf of the canvassers. He said.
in his opinion, the board of canvassers or
Choteau had not deprived my one of his
legal rights. and that they had not violated
the law in excluding the vote of Box elder
precinct. He quoted in support OF his po-
sition tho election law of 1883, sections
1,O41 and LOTT. He contended
that the canvassers were clothed with
the power to discriminate between
legal and illegal votes. He argued that
county canvassing boards had the authority.
under the general election law, to go be-
hind the returns. while the state board OF
canyassers were to act merely az enumera-
tors. Mr.. Tattan also cited the opinion OF
the supreme court In the case OF Lloyd vs.
Sullivan, to the effect that where an officer
of election had committed q fraud his re-
turn was void.
Mr.. Tattan was followed by Hon. II. Il.
Smith. He commended that the court had
no jurisdiction. and that the office Leech,
the r~elator, desired was filed, and that the
supreme court was not the tribunal au-
thorized to inquire into the matter. In
support Of these statements Attorney
Smith quoted that section of the constitu-
ton declaring that "the term OF service OF
the members thereof (the legislative as
semtly) shall begin the next day after
ton nine, of the same a%rticle.
which says that each house shall
Judge of the elections. qualifications and
returns of its members. Mr.. Smith argued
an act that is nugatory. According to the
authorities" continued Mr.. Smith. the
writ the relator asks for should only be
granted when there is no other remedy
Leech has another remedy. provided bl
the constitution, Of which he has no
the Mecca of those who do not care te
avail themselves of other adequate RENE
dies in Law. Let ug get back to the RICH
road"
Mr.. Smith took up otner points III tD'
demurrer, and also showed wherein ~
thought the writ itself was defective. ii,
fortified his position on all the points witt
numerous authorities. He WAS followed b.
Miss Knowles, who made n brief argumen
Arguments on the demurrer to the altern
alive writ of mandate were continued j
the afternoon. But few spectators wer
present. Ex-Chief Justice Wade made tn
closing argument for the republican con
testant. His Fl at point was that the aft
dayit of Leech is the original pleading i
the case, and constituted oil the pleadinRs
and that the writ was in the nature cf
and that all there was to tn
writ was that it brought the parties int
court. Second, that there were no obliga
tions to canvass oil the votes and all tt
returns, regardless of whether they we.
legal or illegal, fraudulent or not; and tha
if any attempt vera made to set them asid
it would have to be a contest before tt
legislature. Mr.. Wade argued that all the
wanted WAS to have the court to comman
the issuance of o certificate to Leech by I'll
canvassinQ board.
George f. Shelton made the closing argl
ment for the oanvassing hoard. AT hve
M. he had not finished and tho court az
iourned until 10 n. M. to-day. when nj,
Shelton will finish his argument. II
main points were that the judge who issue
the writ had no jurisdiction to do so; that
was directed to four individuals. and not
a board of ounty canvaBser5 ut all; an
third, that the writ itself was the origin
pleading, and not the affidavit upon whit
it was founded. j. w. YRtten, who is
counsel for the canvassing board. wi
return to Fort Benton to-day.