New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-04-19

had been transmitted to that officer through the
mail by the County Clerk of Duchess County
second. by his acquiescence In the canvass OF
the "Mylod returns" by the Board OF State Can
vasscrs en- the pretext that the corrected re-
turn removed by him was not before them.
To determine the truth untrth Of these charges it
IS necessary examine the exact situation Of affairs
OF the time Judge Maynard is alleged to have com
mitted such acts.
Judge Maynard gave 10 the Board OF State Can
advice to their duties in every one OF the
districts In which there contest. His advice
affirmed in every by the Court Of Appeals
The charges against Judge Maynard are confined en-
trely TO the advice he gave In reference TO the con-
test In the XVIII Senatorial District As early rs the
Goth day of November. 1891, certificate from That
district had been duly fled in accordance with the
laws OF this State in the oice OF the secretary OF
State The Board o, state Canvassers in session
Judge Maynard advised them that 1t was their duty
to count smch certificate This certificate is spoken OF
as the Mylod certificate"
MAYNARD's ADVICE TO THE STATE BOARD.
An application for a mandamus was made by tie
Republican contestants in that district retnaoe on
the 9th day Of December 1891, before Judge EdwaNS
at his chambers In tho city Of Hudson. By TINS
mandamus the Republicans sought to restrain Tue
Board OF State Canvassers from counting the Myioa
certificate The Board OF state Canvasers were ao-
viseA by Judge Maynard that no judge sitting al
Special could restrain their action, and that e
only court having jurisdiction In the premises was the
General Term of the lid Department. This advice
was subsequently affirmed by the Court OF APfoas'
Therefore, Oh the eth day OF December, had the boau
OF State Canvasses followed his advice and performed
their duty, the "Mylod certificate would have been
counted and Edward b. Osborne would have taken his
seat rs Senator from the XVIII District without further
question
After tho 7th day Of December the only power Oh
the Board was that conferred upon 1t by the supu
lattm and tho proceedings under it, their hrst meeting
Afn
they having no power under the law TO remain IN
session for moro than five days. on that Gay Judge
Maynard. acting for the Board OF state CahVaSsers
entered into stipulation with the claors acuhs Ioi
the Republican party in the County OF Dutchess Iha'
stipulation made, not alone In the puchess county
case but also in the Onondaea, o'euoeh anu honee00
senatorial District cases.
The ttIe of the Dutchess County suit was Tho
People Of the state of NewYork, on the relation Oh
William c. Daley and John i. Plat, against the Boaru
Of State Canvassers Of the state OF ana It's
individual members" The entire object OF that stp-
platjon was 10 benefit the Republican party, ana 10
prevent possible wrong being done by the Board Oh
state Canvassers n that date awarding to osborne
his certificate OF election. BY the terms OF thal sup
ulation 10 expressly provided that the proceedings
OF the Board of State Canvassers NIatnG 10 'e Gun
vass OF votes for senator in that and the other dis
rcts IN controversy should be suspended until the de
csion Of the Court of Appeals upon an appeal to be
o,4hwi,h taken from the orders made in such various
contested election cases
THE BAR ASSOCIATIONS REPORT CNIClSED'
The committee of the Bar Association express as
constituent that proposition should be seriously man
iained BY q public officer. holding place III the highest
judicial tribunal OF the state that 1t Is competent
for the Board OF State Canvassers, by agreement
with private individuals who may have Instituted suits
against t. to directly suspend the operation Of the laws
OF the State" and they assert that the proposition
amounts TO the assertion that the members OF the Boau
of state Canvassels have authority wherever IN teii
Judgment it is expcdicnt. to refuse to receive and act
upon those solemn legal evidences of tie popular WILL
as expressed at elections. which the law impeia'NeN
requires them to receive and act upon
This language. while fOrclDe i meaningless uhesS
IL DO the judgment of that committee that WAS '"c
duty Of the Board Of State Canvassers TO nave couhu
the Mylod certificate" there and then. And II is I
strange reflection upon the assumed Integrity OF tnoSe
gentlemen that they should complain that Judge May
nard though advising as lawyer that II WAS the duty
Of the board to forthwith Should for the Pur
pose Of being certain that there was no error ID |
his advice BY which the defeated Republican candidate
could be injured have urged the Board 10 stretch their
powers the extent not Of refusing to receive and art
upon the solemn legal evidences OF the popular WILL
but to await the decision OF tie highest tribunal Of the
State on the allegations made by the Republican con
testants that they violating their duty II they
counted such returns at that tine.
1t NAV be that Judge Maynard erred In giving this
advice. In the light OF subsequent events. we be |
leve the "Myod certificate should have been counted
then and there. But 1t is an evil mind. indeed that
asks and approves concession and then critlcscs
those who grant it,
But what IS more, the very REALTORS who signed and
obtained snch concession proceeded forthwith 10 |
change the situation. Judge Maynard was counsel |
20 tho Board Of State Canvasscrs. lie had taken
part In, and there is nothing to show that he knew,
anything to the situation Of. any other litigation,
than those to which his clients were parties. 1t is
asserted that at the very time tlls stipulation was
made the same REALTORS were engaged in another pro
cecding by which they sought TO obtain mlndamus
compelling the Board OF County Canvasscrs Of the
county Of Dutccss 20 recOnvcne and Iecanvass the
vote OF the county.
HOW MAYNARD UNDERSTOOD THE STIPULATION
1t is claimed by Judge Maynard that the fair intent
of the stipulation and his understanding Of II was that
II meant that other proceedings OF any kind were
10 be taken TO alter tho situation in which the Board
Ct Canvasscrs then stood The argument IN favor OF
this position is 50 strong amount to conviction.
Judge Maynard having advised the Board TO count
at that time could scarcely have committed 50 great
an error ~ advise them, by their own act. to |
postpone the counting for period OF three weeks,
81 he had any suppose that the Republican
contestants would meantime change the state Of |
affairs by causing 10 be forwarded 10 the Board OF
state CanvasserS new and different certificate.
II is claimed by the Committee OF the Bar Asso |
ciatlon that Mr.. Joseph ii. Choate and Mr. Matthew
Hale, and all the counsel who were opposed TO |
Judge Maynard, did not hold the same understanding
but we have not been favored by this committee |
with any evidence to sustain such statement In their
report, though they did, under OATH state that we |
were given all the evidence before them.
We do not, however, regard 1t important to deter
mine how counsel may have understood construed |
the stipulation. The attorneys for the respective
parties may have honestly entertained different views
upon tho subject; the stipulation must be construed
according It's and In the light Of the proceed
ings had under 1t; and In so constituting 1t we have
no hesitation In affirming that during the tendency Of
the case In the Court OF Appeals the Controller,
member OF the State Board OF Canvassers, could not
properly receive and transmit to the Secretary OF
state another return from Dutchess County without
L.. Inn Dill 4. hnI Mr