The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-02-03
ELECTION
CASES HEARD.
Continued from Page ~

cne first point was determined i'll favor
OF me commission, and if upon the rec
ORD There Was a question of inquiry, or
exercise of discretion raised, then they
must determine that as they would.
10 arrive at determination
ceeded TO look into the statutes
upon the subject Of elections so as 10
lnu out what was provided under the
territorial law and what the method
was IN making returns-what con-
StltuteG the returns, and the canvass
ing OF those returns. prior TO the pas
sage of the Edmunds law, which did
away with certain officers provided
Tor by the territorial law and cast
them elsewhere After ascertainiDg
what the law Of the territory provided
before the passage Of the Edmunds
law, then they might come TO the in
CURRY who it was that was to per-
form the duties taken away by the
ninth section of the Edmunds law.
and especially who were to perform
Che functions of canvassing the votes
&fAst for the members of the IegisIa-
@ra and also to the constitutional
Convention; because the enabling act
provided that the board that can
Vassed the votes for delegates to the
constitutional convention should be
the same as canVaSsed the votes for
delegates to the Legislature of the ter
ritory.
Counsel then read from, and com
mented upon, at great length, the law
of the territory with reference to
elections, passed in 1878 He made the
point, from the reading Of the law
that If the right of any person voted
Tor, for any Office. was in any way
affected, that the board had the right
III open the ballot boxes and find out
TIE discrepancy. 1t was the board s
duty in such d case to do so.
The idea Of an election was that, In
electing a man to Office. there should
be absolute certainty that the man is
rightly elected. II a man was clecte q
by one vote he was entitled to the
Office. Counsel commended that the I'D
munds law only affected certrtn OIL
GERS provided for in the territorial
law. and that the commission when
discrepancies arose, had the right Ia
open boxes and determine who was
justly entitled to the office The county
court. prior TO the passage of the Ed
1nunds law, had this right. and when
that right was repealed, and the power
given to the commission. the COM
mission had the right to go into the
ballot boxes and settle the wrong
4ether they decided rightly OF
dngly, it made no difference under
law. If this then, was the mean
\ of the law, and those were the
fjes of the officers before being IN
1S1aered with by congressional legisla.
ton, what was now the law with refer
ence TO those administering it. Counse
contended that it was not the purpose
of the act of Congress to repeal TIT
election laws, but it was the purpose tx
declare vacant certain election off
ces, to take from the assessors thei
powers, from the clerks, the Secretar!
and the governor their powers. and as
sign them where2 Upon those prope
persons appointed by the Utah com
mission in so far as authority wa
given them by act of Congress, t
appoint persons to perform those func
lions, and by the commission itself 81
far as it vas a dome in that power
Counsel referred to what had beer
the practice of the Utah commission
ever since it had been q hoard witt
regard to the conducting OF elections
and then went on to define what wa
meant by a ministerial act He quote
authorities upon the subject, and con
cluded by again contending that tn
Utah commission. for the purpose O
solving any question that might be i
doubt, had the right to open the bal
lot boxes. They alone. in any case
could determine when such a proceed
ing was necessary.
Johnny Zaue'S LfttIe Adventure.
When Mr.. Williams concluded Attol
ney John NJ. Zane rose to reply o
behalf of the petitioners and respond
ehts, but his course was cut very Shol
lv Chief Justice Merritt. who, as we
as the other members Of the suprem
bench, remembered the contemptuoU
a1@. Insulting manner in which NJ
&c had referred to the Supren
s55nch ia open court when these case
were up before Judge Bartch.
Mr.. Zane rose and began: May
ulease the court" when he was intei
rupted by Chef Justice Merritt sa!
ing:
Before you proceed, Mr.. Zane, I wis
10 state that the court has inform;
ton that the following statement WI
made by you (readlng from the Tr
bune Of Jan. 10
They desire to get this case in
rhe supreme court freed from the loa
"a odium which has been cast upon
Ok these frauds and forgeries upon Il
returns. ! am free to say that if tn
case goes up in this manner there
little doubt what the supreme cour
constituted as it is. would do about Il
I am requested by the court" co
tinued the chief justice. TO a!
whether you uaade that statement?"
Attorney Zane (deliberately)-At III
time and at this hour I must decline
answer your question
Judge NIerritt-Then you need n
proceed.
Attorney Zaue-I take an excepti
and 1 would like 10 state my eXcepti
upon the record.
Judge oIerritt-Take your seat.
Attorney Zane-DoeS Your honor c
cline to allow me to take my exec
ton?
1--WE decline 10 hear You at all. Y
may state your exception in writ
and file it with the clerk
Mr.. Zane at once collapsed and thin
ing discretion was the better part
valor, made no further attempt to g
dress the court, but walked out of I
9m and into Clerk Dunbar's Off
vnere he wrote down his exceptions
the action Of the court in refusing
hear his argument and filed the doC
menf with Clerk Of the Supreme Coz
Bache.
The document read as follows:
In the supreme court Of Utah tel
tory. j. .. Page, respondent, VS.. j.
Letcher ct al. appellants. Mandan
rase; prohibition case. The court h.
ing upon the opening of the argum'
of John NJ. Zane, attorney for J.
page, respondent, asked the said Jo
M Zane whether or not a certain al
cIe nub9ished in the Salt Lake ia
3Sssh1lne was authorized by lhims
and the said John III. Zane having
clined 20 answer the said question. a
The court having refused to permit
caid John NJ Zane to state his exc
zion but having permitted him TO
~, ir1cr 11e =,