The news & observer., 1897-01-21
Asked to Count Votes That
Were Never Cast.
THE MECkLENBURG CASE
Eighty Five Republicans + p
fused TO Vote.
AND NOW THEY Wis TreY HAD
The Legislature Asked 70 Break Tre'
cedent a Hundred Years Oio
TO Obige Them in the
Matfar
Matter.

Matter.
1,be hearing of the Mecklenburg cleo
t;on eases was continued yesterday be-
fora the House Elections committee,
which was in session from to 6:30
o'clock In the Supreme court room.
Reading of the depositions in the case
of Clanton and Williamson VS.. Reid and
Ransom was concluded and argument by
counsel began. One speech on each side
was beard Col George Il. Bason speak
ing for the contestants and Mr.. ii. Z.
Duls for the contestees.
The case grows out of the fact that
in Pineyille precinct No. =, Mecklenburg
county, a registrar living in another town
ship was, by mistake, appointed by the
clerk. Before the mistake was found OUT
80 voters, principally negroes, registered
When the error was discovered the names
We're erased as not being legally register
ed and a new registrar appointed. lie
registered 20 names, principally Demo
Gratis. but the voters whose names were
stricken off the book refused to register
again, and did not go to the poiilhg pace
on election day. Had they voted, now
ever, and voted the Repubilcan ticket
tbe result would have been different. AS
II wos the Democratic nominees for the
House were elected. Now the Repub-
I;cap candidates come forward and ask
that the S5 votes be counted for them
and they be given the seats held by the
Democrats.
There are also several points Of law
involved in the case.
In opening the argument, Col george
F. Bason said the proposition or CON
testants is that if all the electors IN
lMecklenburg county who were entitled
to vote had been allowed TO cast their
ballots. the contestants would have been
elected.
The cause of the division of Pineville
township into two precincts was relateo
and Col. Bason contended that 1T made
no difference whether the REGISTRAR ohn
Alexander-lived in precinct No. : or not,
as the contestees contended. But he held
that the registrar did live IN the town
ship and that the S5 electors whom he
registered ought to have been allowed
TO vote. He further said that if there
was any election in Pineville precinct.
No. 2. the S5 were entitled to cast their
votes and have them counted; af there
was no election then the 80 who did vote
ought to be thrown out, and either plan
would seat the contestees.
Col. Bason contended also that the
ticket voted in that precinct had on 1t
two many names for justices OF the
peace-there being 20 names on the ticket
for magistrates when there were only IA
vacancies TO FILL This, he said, vitiated
the whole ticket and they should be not
counted.
Continuing Col. Bason said that it was
declared by the Supreme court IN the.
case of Harris VS.. Scarborough that
when an individual voter offers to COM
plv with a reasonable regulation in refer
ence to registration, and is prevented
from compliance by the wrongful act of
the registrar, his vote should unques-
tiomably be counted" In the case at is
sue. he said, it was a clerical error and
no fault of the voters that prevented
their exercise of their right to cast their
ballots, and that their votes should be
counted.
AS to giving the contestees 30 days
notice the counsel contended that that
was not necessary; that the law only in
tended that ample time should be given
the other side to make reply; that q
DAYS notice had been given and that was
sufficient.
In replying to Col. Bason. Mr.. III. G.
Dufs, for the c0ntestees, contended that
much OF the evidence brought forward
by the contestants was hearsay. There
is no other evidence as TO how the 80
voters, whose names were erased, would
have voted Four men make affidavit
that they believe these S5 men would
have voted for the contestants.
But even admitting that the names
were illegally stricken off, continued Mr..
Duls. it is the duty of the elector to tender
his ballot before he has amy right to
claim chat his ballot be counted. This
the S5 voters did not do They did not
even go to the polling place. The ballot
that a man tenders is the best and only
reliable evidence as to how he intends to
vote. but in this case only three voters
have testified as to how they would have
voted. They have no right to testify as
to how others would have voted.
The Code, section 1850, requires the
contestant to give the contestee 30 days
notice, and this act has been in force for
100 hundred years. In 1898, the Legisla
ture changed this to require notice to be
given 80 days prior to the meeting of the
General Assembly. This notice must set
forth the particular grounds of the con-
test This, Mr.. Duls, said was not done
in this case, and nine-tenths of the wit
nesses were put on the stand without
any notice whatever. 1t has always been
held by the Legislature, he said, that
no contest would be entertained unless
these forms, prescribed by it, be con
formed with.
Even taking all the evidence produced
and admitting it to be true, Mr. Duls,
thought the contestants had failed to
make out case. In addition to this the
contestees had not had sufficient time to
obtain evidence answering the depositions
taken by the contestees The law had
not been complied with and the Legisla-
ture, if they entertained this contest,
would go back on the usage Of 100 years.
In regard to the action Of the So voters,
whose names were stricken off the book,
staying away from the polls, Mr. Duls
said the evidence showed that they did
not stay away from the polls because
E..arnl .;.ln....o ctL cr....l.