New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-03-23

had never heard. ..,..,o, - tho returns Of
tbe est was regular and lawful ON tho moraIns OF
The 22d they were regularly anu mT WV Secretary Of
late and the Controller. The secretary 81 d., S'; iwo
under the statute, was bo1nd to pr oGd CONTROLLER
copies in the Offices Of the Governor anu these
aud those officers Ind right ~ law 10 ueN stnto
copies any other person than me 70 % pnnG
the County Clerk for contempt In not QDeSae ba md
in forwarding the return H Sri rct1rns TO the
0niccrs prescribed by the statute lie shy
But though the duty lmpsed on the clerk Doc oy tno
totu,o and the order OF this Court was to transmit sun
, mar a., same pont this duty OF the clerk ceased,
and that the responsibility for the returns de'oNcu upo"
other officers. The person who was clerk I'sh' 'l'
ward puriln The returns and thereby commit an oH'n~0'
hut II would not be misconduct but personal CRIME
nor would IL be q dsodience ot the courts oruer ouen
,, occurred when the returns reached The officers 10
whom by the Law and the Courts mandate they were d
| "a 30 no cont There was therefore in law and
in fact complete transmission OF the returns to the oeers
prcscr.bd by Th>ctrns were not before the
po,rd of SUITE Canyasers because Of any diect IN
the transmission Of dioeedience OF the oruer Oh u"
Court BY the action OF III secretary Oh S'ao
the Governor and the counsel Of the Controller the returns
were taken several public Offices where uey hAu
been properly received and were given to Mr. Enans
THE REMOVAL WITHOUT WARRANT.
Even II the stays WEIR valid TO the County Clerk
and the amended statement transmitted by nm IN
violation Of the this. in our opinion would nhord
mo- Justification for their removal By Judge Maynard
The situation County Clerk with reference to the
ays did not authorize Mr Maynard TO remove te doc-
unent In question from the once II The Controller
removal Of those returns. therefore on te morn
Ing Of December D. by Judge nayhru ana ar f'lus,
Vas entirely witnOIi any warrant or )usuhcation III
| law. to be found in any order of stay. 49,. Mound,
Your committee closes this review OF the grounds
apon which Judge Maynard has endcavorcd to justly
al, action In respect to the corrected Dutchess county
returns. by expressing their convci tit IL Is rs
whole aud In All its parts, insufficient. $3.50
Your committee now proceed To con . TN Jgngs
Nayunds connection with the uruUl of tlc boaru -,
state Ctlnvas,cr IN refusing O canvass the corrected
return and canvassing in place thereof "hnt Is called
As We have already observed. p0twihstandng that
Ss't Cl.rk OF DutchcSs COUNTY TO the Governor the
,ecrctry OF state and The Controller had been Re
cd ,n memYnrs Of me Board Of state Canvnssers
| had been servcd with authenticated copies Of the
jude Maynard now dlscaims any connection with
That action ana ,iats thf' ~ e ~ort =, hnpc1ls
| wa, announced but he fails g. state how or why uat
o.nncCon terminated. This omission is nN with
cANXor EvADE RESPONSIBILITY.
Under the existing circumstances, In our opinion he
couM not be Invested Of responsibility lie saw the
Board Of State Canvasscrs violating the law. and Is
suing false certificate upon false return. and max
Ing his act In removing the true return tho preteN
| Tor their action. lie caunot cvadc Just re-pons
biti- BY asserting that his relations TO the case had
it seems 10 Us quite clear that the removal and The
,uppf,-,ion of corrected return, could have had
10 other purpose than the one actually accomplished
The o:dnh order Of Judge Edwards in expires terms
directed tie counting ~ such returns a. may here
! 9orr lc Med III" parties ana counsel on hol!
sides were well aware that a corrected return hAd
already been ordered ana womb he soon ~ inc iul,s
al the state Cauva,-er,, Unless It's transmission could
be prevented. By mean, lawful or nnhw'u. me oiy
| way I'm which Osborne could he counted III was bi
-upprc~~ing the corrected return and counting the IL
counted. A. matter Of fact the corrected return was
| suppressed. The action Of Judge MAYNARD. and Of
| Euans who acted under his advice, 1t seems very
char Ia could have possibly had no other rnd IN
| view except the one that was actually accomplished
JUDGE May nard lel',i mr''nc' cvHem'e 1slhnt
himself stronger than any tha, We previously htl III
| our possession: on III, o"n statement on Dec 'nbe,
| the opinion Of the 'onrt OF Appeal upon the pre-
| text That the corrected re:nrL was not before the
ol,hguqh he was well aware Of the fact That the dcci
the corrected return. n the removal Of which he was
| the chef party concerned
| 4 STATE PRISON OFFENCE.
| II We correctly stated the facts. the offence com
mittcd by Judge May nard Is one OF the gavet known
| to the law.
our Penal Code seems explicit Section "a is as
| follows:
4 person who wfnlly and unlawfully removes. mutt.
atcs DESTROYS conccals obitcates record. book
rapcr document other thing. ned or deposited In
public office or with public officer by authority Of law
"a punishable by imprisonment for not more than i've years,
| or by a fine Of not more than 1900, or 0y both
| Tho Supreme Court Of the state Of Pennsylvania.
! I'm the case of Commonwealth Vs. Mcllalc. which was
on MI indictment for procqrlnE Mlsc count ana e
|
We Of opinion that all such crimes as especially
affect public lndictablc at common law Til.
test whether precedcnt be FOUND In the books
but whether they nJurousy Affect the guDhc police and
economy. II needs Argument to show That the acts
chalgd in these indictments Of his character. They
only offences which affect public society but they
affect IL giayest An offence againr the
freedom purity OF elections is crime against the
Nation. IL strikes the foundations Of republican in.
sttuons tendency IS to prevent the expression Of
the will OF the people in the choice Of ruic's ami 20
weaken public confidence in elections When this
confidence IS destroyed the end of popular government
Is not distant. 90 Pm. STATE H.. 400
In con-dcrug what action, If any, 1t /, appropriate
that this association shO.d take In respect TO these
grave occurrences. II i necessary Ia consider whether.
II Judge MAYNARD bad counsel. performed an
act in violation Of the law, 1t may yet not have been
done under the Influence of honest mistake Of unIe
hco1ng partisan zeal. In heated controversy, where
hnal rrsut which should b" declared In relation to the
| election Of n single candidate. The members OF this
oclton wolf hirdiy feel llNtlied In recommending
action In relation f. any Juu'la 9ihccr. Tor any OF
thDc Of opinion or a'uOn, which all Of u, arr
liable TO commit. If the laws have been violated an
mnOccnt mistake may not excuse the violation. but tn
prosecution and the punishment may. In such cases.
otter be LEI! to the Officers regularly appointed Ia
| force the laws. This association has authority
| greater than that possessed by any organization OF
citizens having for rs object public purposes. But
there arr notwithstanding. occasions when II proper
for the czcns Of the state either In their individual
or I'm some collective capacity, 20 tnkc notice OF what
thcy concede ~ be great public wrongs, and Invoke
SD far rs hey mlN Oicil action In relation thereto
PROVISIONS OF THE ELECTION LAWS.
II Is material here TO observe that the provisions
Of our election laws contemplate that the popular
wi manifested by ballots, should be collected
and nscertsdncd In the manner precisely pointed out
by law, and finally declared In manner also indicated
by careful legal provisions. The Board OF state Can.
ha, In this respect the most important duties
to discharge. They ministerial officers represent
ri. a.. Passenger. for ruropcs ,.,, co.,,.,