The watchman and southron. [volume] (Sumter, S.C.) 1881-1930, 1898-11-23
ILLEGALIqY IN LEE
COUNTY ELECTION.
THAT rs THE FINDING OF
TIE SPECIAL REFEREE.
WHY TIE PROPOSED COUNTY
HAS FAILED.
The State, Nov 81.

The State, Nov 81.
From the finding of the special
referee in the Lee county election
case, which has just been filed with
The clerk of the supreme court, it
looks as though that county will be
declared by the supreme court not to
have been constitutionally framed on
account of Irregularities in the elec-
sion. Last winter under a special
proclamation by the governor an
election was ordered for a proposed
new county to be formed of portions
of Darlington, Sumter aud Kershaw
counties and to be known az Lee.
Under the election laws of this
State tabnlated statement of the
vote at each precinct has to be made
out, certified to by the commissioners
OF election aud sent to the Office of
che secretary of state.
The election was held. The op.
ponents declared it was illegally con-
Quoted and that proper election
returns were not made for that
portion of Darlington county voting
on the question Counsel was en-
ployed by friends and opponents of
the new county and the case carried
to the State supreme court. Before
the court could make a decision it
had to have all the facts of the case.
Accordingly, counsel for both parties
agreeing, Mr.. Joseph F. Rhame of
Manning waa appointed special
referee to hear all testimony on the
points at issue.
The order Of the court making this
appointment sets forth the issues to
be determined as follows
ga majority of this court as thus
constituted having reached the con.
clusion expressed in an order of this
date, that the only issues of fact
necessary to be referred to referee
were
l. "Whether the board of COM
missioners of election for Darlington
county certified the result of the
election held in those portions of
said county proposed to be cut off
for the purpose of forming the pro
posed new county of Lee, in tabulated
statement of the vote at each pre-
clint and transmitted the same to the
secretary of state
2 elf 30, whether it appears from
each statement that twothirds OF
those voting at such elections were
in favor of the establishment of Lee
county -
The referee in his finding on the
facts treats fully on every paper on
record purporting TO be election
returns, and of one of the most
important of such documents. says:
This paper, as will be seen. is not
q certified, tabulated statement,
| neither does it purpors to be such,
and if these defects by any sort of
construction, could be brushed away
the paper is not authenticated by the
commissioners Of election for Oar.
lington county, nor does it purrort
to emanate from them, but from Ger.
tain persons styled Board of Can.
vassers.'
| 'Is seems to the referee that, in
reference TO the authentication of the
results of an election held uoder the
act just referred to above, the require
neuts thereof are mandatory, and that
certified, tabulased abatement of the
result of such ao election is indispensa.
BILE, and such statements to be valid
must be the result of canvass made
by the commissioners of election, as
such. no board of eanvassers being
provided for in the said act.
''Io conclusion, the referee finds and
reports: That the board of commission
ers of election for Darlington county
did not certify the result Of the election
held 10 those portions of said county
proposed to b. cut of for the purpose
of forming the proposed uew county Of
Lee, . !: >: 10 tabnlated statement Of
The vote at cash precinct aud transmit
the same to the secretary of state.
This 6odiug dispeuses with the
necessity Of any inquiry as finding by
the referee on the second issue referred
t. him !"
When the court meets it will reuder
it's decision 10 this matter.