The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-01-02

ton, and issue certificates to the per- u
sons said to have been elected2 1t is
to require the Commission to act con-
traxy to their sworn duty. It is a
piece of effrontery that would be
amazing if it did not come from the
Republican party.
Notwithstanding the explanations
that have been given, is necessary,
in order to clear away the fog that has
been raised around the question, to
state the case again. 1t is alleged that
Hahe Utah Commission have no other.
authority, in reference to this canvass,
than was conferred upon the Governor
and Secretary Of the territory under
the election laws of Utah That is
the way it is put by the Republican
advocates.
It.is matter that every one who
can read may decide for himself be-
cause It is 50 plain and simple.
The canvass IF votes for delegates
to the Constitutional Convention is to
be made in the same way as that for
members of the Legislative Assembly.
We presume there viii be no dispute
as TO that The Enabling Set so re-
quires.
The Utah statute provides that the
canvass of votes for territorial officers
shall be made by the county clerk and
IonA or more members of the county
court in each county, to whom the re-
turns from each precinct are to be
sent
The returns are then to be forwards
ed from all the counties to the Seere-
tary of the territory who. in the pres
ence of the Governor, is to unseal and.
canvass the same, make an abstract
thereof. and within ten days issue a
certificate to each ,nenh of the Leg
islature and territorial officers elected.
That is all very clear. 50 far. But
under the Edmunds Act. which created
the Utah Commission. it is provided
that: 1.-THE canvass and return Of ali
the votes for members of the Legisla-
tive Assembly shall be returned to said
board. which shall canvass all such re-
turns and issue certificates Of election
to those persons Who being eligible
for election, shall appear to have been
lawfully elected, which certificates
shall be the only evidence of the right
of such persons to sit in such assem-
bly, AS we have already shown, the
same rule applies to the election for
delegates to the Constitutional Con-
ventfcn.
Now observe! The returns in these
cases, instead of being sent from the
respective precincts to the county
clerk and county court, are to be for
warded to the Utah Commission, who
are required to perform the duty for
nrerly imposed upon the county officers
as well as that required of the Secre-
tary and the Governor of the terri
tory. There can be no mistake about
that by those who want the facts and
do not wish to brew a mess of mys-
terry.
Now as to the duty of the county
officers, which is imposed in this case
upon the Utah Commission. The law
provides that after the returns have
been received from the several pre-
! cinct5, those county officers shall pro-
coed to carefully examine them. eff
there shall be any disagreement in the
returns in regard to the number of
votes cast for any territorial officer
then said members of the
county court shall canvass the votes,
and proceed as herein directed" How
is that? The law says:
IF no irregularity or discrepancy APP
pear therein, affecting the result of
the election of any candidate, they
shall accept said returns as correct;
but if the right Of any person voted for,
for any office, is in any way affected,
then the clerk and said members of
the county court shall open the ballots
from said precinct and canvass the
same, SO far as to determine the rights
of the person whose office may be af-
| fected."
That is the way the Utah Commits
sion has proceeded. There has been
much said about the returns from
some of the counties and precincts
not having been objected to, while
| others have been canvassed by open
the law has been strictly complied
| with. There were irregularities and
discrepancies in most of the returns.
No matter how they occurred. We
! charge no fraud at present. What we
may have to do later remains to be
seen. But the returns show the dis
crepancies, and all the protestations to
! the contrary are weaker than mild
wind and tepid water
In those cases of discrepancy which
all put together in a county would not
affect the election Of a candidate, the
returns were accepted as the law re-
quires. This rule was applied just the
same whether the candidates voted for
were Democrats. Republicans or Pop
ulists; that made no difference, as
some persons would endeavor to make
out
But where the discrepancies were
such as to affect the result to any can
didates, the ballot boxes were opened
and the canvass made according to
law. until Republican legal proceed
ings stopped the Commission in its
lawful work.
The mandamus now applied for, if
it should be made peremptory. would
require the Commission to proceed in
defiance of law, in opposition to their
official oath, in direct antagonism to
the rights Of candidates who, by afff-
davit flied with he Commission. de-
tmand a lawful recount, and in hostilf-
ty to public policy which requires that
justice shall be done that the investi-
cation shall proceed, and that the
rights of disputing candidates shall be
lawfully determined
There has been nothing done, so far