New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-10-07

casions when it is proper for the citizens Of th'
State either IN their individual or IN some col
lective capacity 10 take notice OF what the,
concede to be great public wrongs. and INVOKE
50 far as they may. official action in relation
thereto.
PROVISIONS OF TIE ELECTION LAWS.
II is material here 10 observe that the pro
visions Of our election laws contemplate tina
the popular will as manifested by Daio'S
should be collected and ascertained In the man
ner precisely pointed out by law. and finally
declared in a manner also indicated by careful
legal provisions The Board OF state Canvass
ers has in this respect the most important du
ties to discharge. They are ministerial officers
isG pe2pT Tary and T" in the dis
charge of their nGicia, duties are bound abso
lutely to ignore ali personal or partisan mo
tivea Unless the duties imposed upon Oiiicers
charged with the asccrtainment ana determl
nation If the results Of popular elections are
faithfully discharged. II Is Impossible ior demo
cratic government to be long maintained. ant
they can be discharged in no other way than 10,
paving a strict obedience to the precise re
qurements OF statutory law The certhe'
statements Of the Boards Of County CanVassers
Transmitted by the County Clerks to the STATE
officers at Albany. are documents of vital I'M
pOrtance. They are under the protection OF 'n'
law. and cannot be dealt with IN any ha''e'
except in strict accordance with law
When the corrected statements. MADE IN pur-
suancc Of the peremptOry mandamus OF the SUI
preme Court. and certified by the County Clerk
Of Duchess County, had reached through m
regular course of the mails. the Offices OF tne
Governor, Secretary of State and controller. IL
should have been dealt with. pursuant 10 me
provisions % law by being delivered 10 unc
Secretary Of state. 1t was not Tor me Officers
by whom that triplicate statement was received
to inquire whether the County Clerk was uhdef
some stay fOrbidding him to deliver H. nor WAS
it within their province To inquire "he'ne' dnI
individuals in the state. public or private hau
agreed that ii should not be transmitted or u
transmitted. sent back. In view of the explicit
provisions of the criminal law having dlrect
reference To public documents. ana IN view Oh
the great importance of such documents In our
political scheme cannot reasonably suppose
that any lawyer could hastily or unrefectingiy
accede to any proposition To lay a violent mana
upon such a paper and dispose OF 1t IN any
other manner than that required by law.
MAYNARD CANNOT ESCAPE.
II II were POSSIBLE to consider judge May
nard's action as action taken in ignorance of the
facts. or in the heat Of a violent political con-
test. or without opportunity for due deliberation
or in ignorance Of the law. this case would pre-
sent different features. But there is no such
possibilitv Judge Maynard has himself cut us
off from that. He has made public proclamation
Of the fact that his decision to remove those
returns was made with fun knowledge OF the
entire situation: that ne took time FOR run de-
liberation: and that after mature hnal consid-
Grafton. he accepts the fun responsibility
for his action.
Opportunity for deliberaton was evidenced by
the entire history Of these legal proceedings:
for II is clearly and conclusively established
that from the IN day Of December the date nn
Of the corrected returns, down to De-
cembcr 90 the date OF the state
canvass. the counsel for the Denne
party were most persistently endcavoring To
have those corrected returns forwarded In order
that they might be counted by the state Can
vassers: while on the other hand. Judge May
nard and the gentlemen with whom he was
acting in concert were persistcntly endeavoring
to prevent the returns from reaching the state
Board. The machinery Of the law was con
tinuousy used To prevent IN" counting OF tnat
corrected return That machinery proving in
sufficient to accomplish their purpose. Judge
MAYNARD. while still holding the Office OF Deputy
Attorney-General Of the state. hims"f delber-
ately took part in the removal Of those returns
he SHOULD BE REMOVED.
II Judge Maynard were now private cti-
zen. your committee would scarcely deem II
cxpedient that this association should take any
action in respect 10 his conduct. He is not a
member Of this body. nor was his action taken
in the judicial district 10 which the objects and
interests Of this association are mainly confined
But 1t SO happens that his conduct was almost
Immediately followed by his elevation TO high
judicial office and in the opinion OF your com
mitiee his action In the particulars under notice
has disclosed clear unftness for high judicial
station They are also Of opinion that IL has
already impaired. and must continue TO I'M
pair the confidence Of the public In him as a
Judge .
Your committee does not suppose that the
conduct of Judge Maynard furnishes any sum
cient ground for his impeachment as II Is not
misconduct in his office as judge. but I'M
pcachment is not the only remedy winch Is
within the power of the Legislature To apply
II Is clothed under the Constitution with the
power Of removal by concurrent resolution. rms
power is not subject 10 the limitations when
attend the exercise Of the power of imp"ach-
m"nt.
Your committee therefore reports and recon-
mcnds the adoption Of the following resolutions
Resolved That copy Of this report b. trans
mttcd 10 the Senate and Assembly, ana ,hht
those bodies be respectfully requested 70 consider
whether the conduct OF Judge Isaac II. Maynard
therein mentioned does not demand an exercise OF
the power remove Judges vested by the NolsllI-
ton In the Legislature.
March %. ls'2
Respectfully submitted. ,-nr