Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1902-11-29
MERELY TO ADD UP VOTES.

1EIStLL1- ~ ALL TX W.
He here said that the duty OF the
Board Of Canvassers was merely TO ao ia
up votes and to discharge no duty IN
which they had any personal IL l me- Ti,is
sress and. therefore, they act. solely
for the stats anf TINS sa 5alt hs sate Court
could have taken jurisdiction, put not
this court, and that there Was a dllier-
ence between this and the Siemp case
that application there made was on pc
half Of the congressman himself I Ina
the rights here sought were purely poilti-
cal aud governmental rights, ana tnf
pt He then cited Mills against Green, from
South Carolina, decided in this circuit,
in which the relief sought to e1af poi not
Within the equitable jurisdiction ito? z,o,s;on
The Chief Justice recalled TINS decls .,ci
case, it not having been reversed by the
United States Supreme Court
That it was impossible for one parry
to have right inconslst t,a+ WIZ ri1,+ me
the plaintiffs should bring this suit to
nreyenr the counting of these votes ne
and others would have a right to BRING
a suit to have the votes counted: En.y
a public nuisance, and an individual 70
abate such nuisance in so far as 1t al
ie TIE PROHIBITION WRIT.
Mr. Christian then took up the writ
If nrohibition and following the lines
suggested by the Chief Justice III the az
ternoon said that such writ issues only
to a court, and from superior to an
inferior court. and only against body
such as the State Board of Canvassers
when acting as a judicial body, citing
Birch against Nudge; g Grattan, 81; ron
and. also, in supervisors of Cuipeper VS..
Gorrel and others. An 20 Grattan.
Mr.. Christian declared that the Board
of Canvas.ers was Ministerial .1,: p 1
orable court; that this court had no right
to trespass on the rights OF this board
Mr. Christian started to suggest rene
dy for the plaintiffs, but -, ADDED tha TT It
should proceed.
He took UP the merits of the case: and
insisted that the proclamation was legal.
proclaimed, but that the point was not
Considered of sufficient weight, in Will
lians VS.. Mississippi. one OF the pest
known cases relating to the new -, Con on
EXCEEDED ITS POWERS.
He showed that the Constitution Of 1863
limited the Legislature to the mere power
to provide for the election OF delegates,
dertooi to require the convention to sub
nit the Constitution to the people it eX-
ceeded its powers under the old Constl-
tuition.
The Chief Justice here asked whether,
the new Constitution had been approved
by the Legislatures and was informed
that it had been recognized by a joint
resolution.
Mr.. Christian then referred to the case
from Texas, which had been referred to
BY the Chief Justice in the afternoon.
where this writ had been denied. He
showed LAT he was :, genuine lawyer.
and not a politician, by declaring that
the Constitution had been formed with
purpoe of DISTINGUISHING no one con-
trary to the Foprtcenth and Fifteenth 18th
United States, but maintained the right
OF the people Of the State to regulate
its suffrage according to the merits OF
the voters.
He laid great stress upon the present
operation of all departments of the State
Governments and showed the court what
difYiculties would arise if the court grant
MT. wise here inquired whether the
Circuit Court of the United States would
have jurisdiction to prevent the State
Board of Canvassers from throwing dice
to settle these elections.
TO which Mr. Christian replied tina 1T
could havana jurisdiction In either case.