Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1895-01-11
KUST NOT TOUCH TIE BALLOTS.
That Is tho Work Of Others Whom
The Commission Nly appoint,
BUT NOT OF TIE BOARD ITSELF.
The Writ OF Mandate ~ Granted, and
the writ OF Prohibition Denied,
nccausr Uunsccssurs.

Following IL the full text Of the do.
cisiou given In tue Third district court
today by Judge Bsuch, IA the case OF
I'D. Page W thoUlAh CemmIssiJBtthc
sanpeie county Constitutional election
casesl:
The telhior In this case was ut tho
general election held in November,
lou4, n candidate Tor delegate 10 tue
Constitutional Convention which 4 70
convene iu March, 1895, to draft o.
Constitution Tor tue new state IN put.
tuanco OF the act OF Cgngrcsa.approvcd
July ION, 1894, known a. tue "Eu.
nbling ACt.D
The defendants constitute tho Ulah
Commission, bJafu appointed by the
PlcHldcnt NJ the United states, and
clothed with certain powers, under tue
laws OF the United S.ntul, iullho mBn.
ugtment anu conduct VI the elections
IN tnia Territory. Tho controversy
h'qaC because Of an attempt by tho
GumnlsslOn 10 oAergiao certain powers
sAlCh the relatOr claims uru u0t With
"a It's province, anu because OF its
allure 10 perform certain acts which
he rclator claims u was IL duty to per-
orm.
The TclAtor avers that AZ the time Of
the election, which was held on tho
Oih day OF November, 1894,
ho was duly Registered anu
qualified oloctor, and candidate In tue
county oi 5anpete In this Territory,
and was eligible 10 the uilicu Tor which
Ao was a candidate; that Judges aud
c.cfka OF election were appointed ~
provided ~ law, and acted NJ said
lection, ana that the foTmalitlea pro.
yidod anu required by law were In all
respects complied with, and the cleo.
ton was Ia all respects duly anu
legally conducted; that as hO0n az tue
polls closed the JUDGES aud clerks I'm.
mOdiatply proceeded 90 canvass the
votes cast IA the several UggclECtl OF
taid county, and without adjournment
completed tuu canvas ma accordance
with Law; that he was o. candidate i1r
election 10 tho Office uf delegate 10 said
Constitution, a. ONO d. several dele
gates nppUrii1ned 10 said county uy mid
enabling act; that it was determined
by said canvass that he received "a
majority OF the votes cast Tor said
uincr; that the results VI tAid canvass
were placed on the lists, were certified,
nnl the lisls sealed and forwarded,
m directed by said Utah Commission,
iu the manner provided by law; that
said Commission received the returns
OF said election, aud, having broken
the scala anu carefully examined the
returns, no Irregularities Or dis.
cfcpsucies appeared therein affecting
tht result OF said election or the result
ul Tue election OF said rclatOT, or Of any
candidate for said office, nor the rights
NJ any person voted Tor, for said glllce;
llnt the said Commission refused 10
bCctpt said returns as correct; that
lheTu was no occasion TO open the
ballot boxes from the precinct " baid
county Tor the purpose OF canVaasing
lhe same 10 determine tho rights Of
any person 10 SAID office, because there
was no Enlargement In the Tolurna
which affected the rights UiHny per-
hJn H. said uiliCe; that tho Commission
AFTER the completion OF the canvass re.
fused 10 declare the result, thereof aud
refused 10 make an abstract thtTeO., or
W certify 10 It's correctness rs Required
by law, aud that % has refused 10 make
40 nutlfuct Of the returns showing the
election OF the TolatOr 10 said Otiice, VI
To mako out anu transmit 10 MIN O
certificate OF HE election, alter demand
made therefor.
Iho defendants duuy tho allegations
OF the Telalor nv ~ his right ~ The
once Rs n result VI tRii election, and
'Nat There were no discrepancies IN TIC
returns OF the election which affected
Tue result OF the election, 40 TO tho re-
lA'or Or oiheu; aud allogu that there
were such irlegulATltieH ant discrrp.
ano'ca on thu face Of tho rowrna that
'uo Hght OF the rulAt0r WAS Affected
Aeieby, and that for that reason thctc
was occasion 10 open the ballot boxer,
AHu becaute Of such irregularities ana
discrepancies tho ballot boxes were
opened By the defendants M order that
zoe ballots might 10 canysatsI aud tho
error corrected,
After an alternative writ OF mandate
had btep granted, tho reln,Or maIo
application Tor writ ui pluulbiuou,
alleging substantially the same iEu,g,
ma asked that the deluuuguts, tho said
ulah Commission, be- urOhlbi,bt from
certifying the result Of said election,
Anu mo number OF votes cast Tor the
t'alntn from tho canvass Oi the Faid
uAllOlB otherwise than from said ft.
ufhs' An alternative writ was Issued
prayed Tor, anu thereafter various
1g'neF candidates for delegates 90 tho
constitutional Convention applied NJ
g'h OF mandata auu prohlblsllni all
w which were based substantially On
,no SAINT facts anu raise similar qul
NoAs OF law. Therefore It was agfesI
b1lh aidus that the Determination
Ne questions OF law under the sta,.
Nj" raised Ia the case ut bar should