Evening journal., 1896-12-30
ARGUMENT TO MORROW
Work Of the Court of Errors
and Appeals.
THE ASSIGNMENT OF ERROR

| PRESENTED BY EX-CHANCELLOR
JAMES l.. -REJOINDER
FILED BY THE ATTORNEYS FOR
THE ADDICKSITES.
DOVER, Dec SO-The Court Of Err
rors and Appeals met here yesterday
and fixed Thursday as the time for
hearing argument in the case as to
whether the mandamus issued by the
court below should stand, and the
Board of Canvass of Kent county re-
assemble and count the vote according
to law. This would give the Union Re
publican members of the General As
sembly the certificates of election.
When the court met James L. VOL
cott of the counsel for the Democrats.
desired TO have the case Strengthened
on the question of who were plaintiffs
in error The Republicans. as well as
Democrats, were made parties to the
suit, and as only the Democrats were
interested, the Republicans did not an
swer. The counsel for the Democrats
asked that the Republicans be COM
PEELED to either answer the case or else
come into court and ask that there be
severance granted.
II. II. Ward, for the Republicans.
maintained that the Democrats had no
right TO raise such a question, and de-
clined TO argue the point unless di-
rected by the court.
The court decided that the Republi-
cans must either answer or ask sever
ance. George M Jones and Edward
| Ridgely, counsel for the Republicans,
and William II. Walker. one of the
/ Democrats who does not join with the
others in this case, appeared and asked
for q severance.
The Democratic attorneys then filed
their assignment of errors, which were
as follows:
First. That the court erred in giving
judgment in favor of the relators in
stead of for the respondents.
Second. That the right of the rea-
/ tors TO the remedy by writ of man
damus in the cause below was not
sufficiently clear and free from doubt
to warrant the issuance of such writ
Third. That the court below erred
in awarding the peremptory writ Of
mandamus because it appears by the
records and proceedings that the plain
tiffs in error could not obey or execute
its command If issued.
Fourth That if issued it would
prove nugatory, unavailable and flu
tile
Firth. That the court erred in allow
/ ing an amendment making the sheriff
of Kent county a. party respondent.
Sixth That the court erred in al
lowing the sheriff Of Kent county to
make himself party respondent TO the
proceedings in his return endorsed on
the rule to show cause why mandamus
should not issue.
Seventh That the court below erred
in allowing an amendment making the
Board of Canvass, composed of the in
specsors. a party respondent
Eighth That the court below erred
in awarding a peremptory writ Of man
damus. because il does not appear by
the petition and the alternative writ
that any certificates of the election In
the respective hundreds and election
districts in Kent county, as prescribed
by law, were ever made, signed, deliv-
cred or deposited, according to the pro
visions of law in that behalf by the in
spectors and judges of any of the said
hundreds or election districts.
Ninth. That the court below erred
in awarding peremptOry writ OF man.
damus, because it appears by the petit
tiOn and alternative writ OF mandamus
and also the return thereto, that votes
were given in West Dover hundred for
every person voted for, or named as
voted for, in said petition and alterna-
tive writ for the respective offices fOI
, which they were respectively candi-
dates. 1t further appears by the said
, return that no certificates of the elec.
tion in said hundred were ever made
and signed by the inspector and judge:
of election in said hundred. And Il
Z further appears also by the said peti
tion and alternative writ that they mol
neither OF them contain any avermeni
, that such certificates of election fol
I said West Dover hundred were evel
made or signed by the inspector and
/ judges thereof.
Tenth. That the court below erret
G in awarding the peremptory writ o
! mandamus because it does not appear
I by the alternative writ and proceed
Z ings that the ballot-box of any hundred
or election district in Kent county con
tanning the votes given at the election
o held November g. 1896, was delivered
a to the sheriff as the presiding office
!, of the Board of Canvass.
Eleventh. That the mandamus pro
ceedings in the court below were de
fective, insufficient and invalid an,
contrary to the settled rules Of plead
= ing and practice governing such pro
y ceedings in this state.
Twelfth. That the court erred IL
= awarding the peremptory writ of man
u damus, because every material fact OF
= which the REALTORS relied was not sc
: forth in their petition or alternative
y writ of mandamus distinctly unre
:, servedly, fully and clearly.
(, Thirteenth. That the court erred il
!, deciding that the persons named as in
= spectors and respondents in the alter
native writ of mandamus were dul!
and legally constituted inspectors, Their
being no allegation in said petition
. and writ to that effect.
Fourteenth. That the court erred II
. awarding said peremptory writ of man
n damus, because the plaintiffs below de
- PENDANTS in error had another adequat
II legal remedy
- Fifteenth. That the court erred Il
,,s awarding the said peremptory writ o
- mandamus, because mandamus is not
= proper or allowable remedy when th