The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1896-12-24

"'eritas" V. "Iusttia."
Editor OF The Times:
Sir,-ln card i'm your issue of this
morning. "Justtia" seems disposed TO
defend the Board of State Canvassers.
or rather TO be- more correct. the ma
Jority Of that Board. from what he con-
sidcrs Misrepresentation i'm the public
MIND as 10 their course in the host
mandamus case. and as this notable
case has impressed me differently from
the way II seems to have impressed
him. l beg a little OF your space to
reply.
In the first place. all of the Board
present, except Governor OFerrall voted
10 give the certificate of election 10 Mr..
FLOOD, because Of the fact that the IN
correct buckingham county returns gave
sufficient number Of votes TO jacob
Ost (Which they refused 10 count Tor
j. lOsD TO alter the result, ana give
Mr.. Flood majority. This they ala
in spite Of the amended returns before
them, 40 the nature of q certificate from
inc very oIhcers VINO haa sih"rn tn'
nrst returns. IN which certificate II was
shown that all of the votes returned
for Jacob Yost should have been re-
turned for j Nost.
The Governor contention was. as
shown hy bis answer TO the subsequent
mandamus proceedings. that the votes
Incorrectly returned tOi JACOB oSt
should be counted In WIKI those Tor
j. lost, that Do there was any doubt as
10 the CORRECTNESS of this contention. DE-
was removed by the fact that the eel TIM
cate before the Board corrected the mis-
take which the Commis siOners OF tiec-
ton OF Buckingham county had evident
ly made. and that in either event the
final certificate OF election should be- de-
llvered 10 Mr.. lOst. At this stage the
mandamus proceedings were instituted.
Now let MS see what the Court held.
First. they declared that the Board or
Election Commissioners or buckingham
county was not "functus OiilciO' CAS-
majority of the Board OF Canvassers had
held b. 10 bel until 10 had performed
the statutory duty enioned upon IL. and
performed 10 correctly. and, therefore,
they granted the mandamus upon TINS
county board. directing ~ 10 make am
other formal return. in which IL should
correct such errors as had crtpt INTO the
the first return. THE Court did not
say that the certificate filed by the Buck
ingham officials was insufficient but,
having the matter before them. natural
ly concluded that In would be better To
have a formal amended return from
those officers. presuming. no doubt that
the State Canvassing Board would cheer
fully and promptly consider this amend
ed return. which the Court had ordered.
and give the certificate OF election 10
Mr.. Yost accordingly.
This Board of state Canvasscrs is
dignihcd body. and IL can DE readily
seen that the Court Of Appeals would
not issue any mandamus against u II ~
could be avoided by "a suggestion. Tn
happily. however. this suggestion was
not needed. and 30 became necessary for
tho Court TO formally and uoremntorily
require an the hands OF tlis majority
the consideration of the amended re-
turn for which the Governor. as one
OF the Board. had AN along contended.
II may Dee said in defence OF the appd-
rent obetiuacy of the majority that
having token the position they did. they
could not reccde from IL. except upon
"a distinct command from the conrt OF
last resort. but in this connection n
may not boz amiss 10 call attention 10 the
fact that IN the case OF keesee vs.. Hud-
son. which recently came before this
they counted the votes from Halifax
county. as shown IN certain amended
returns-and that without any order
from the Court Of Appeals so TO do.
10 seems TO me that the course of the
majority of the Board Of state Cam
Vassers was not only Inconsistent with
their former attitude in such matters.
but has been shown by the decision OF
the Court of Appeals in the Mandamus
proceedings 10 have been absolutely o.
legal and % is equally clear tnAt th"
ultimate conclusion Of the whole m tier
sustaius Governor o Fcrrall i'm MS
course and his vote throughout.
40 one has charged the honorable
gentlemen composing the majority Of the
Board with Intentionally disregarding
their sworn duty because Of their par
tsan inclnations. hut. on the other
hand. 80 ought not go Dee contended, Doe
the face OF the decision Of the court
Of last resort. that that court has sua-
tanned them in their construction OF the
law
Let MS give honor 10 whom honor is
due. and give 10 the Governor OF Viz
ginia the credit OF being not only fear
loss. but correct NERlTAS.