Albuquerque daily citizen. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1895-1903, 1902-04-01
THE DECISION.
Judge Bakers Ruling as TO the
Registration Law.
EXPIRED MARCH 81.

In the cases of George w. Harrison
VS.. Board of Registration of Fourth
ward, and l.. II. Chamberlin VS.. Boards
of Registration of all -four wards. the
court yesterday. after hearing the evil
dence and argument, sustained the
contention of the plaintiffs and by it's
order enjoined the respective boards
from in any ann changing the reg
~istration lists as they appeared at the
close of Thursday, March 81, by either
adding names thereto, to be added to
the revised list to be delivered to the
city clerk for use at the halls. or omit
ting or erasing therefrom. and
in case they had already delivered
such lists to withdraw the same from
the city clerk and correct and certify
them as required by the courts order.
These cases grew out of the facts
that the various boards of registration
threatened and gave out that they had
the right and would exercise it. to
erase, add to. strike from or omit any
name they deemed should be omitted
from the revised lists privately on the
last day of registration as was done
at the city election two years ago..
when eighty or more legal voters were
in this ann DISTINGUISHED. AS soon
d0 IL was louih thdt III Na1NlNo
were being resorted to, a committee of
attorneys of the republican central
committee called on the boards of reg
istration, who themselves verified
these rumors. The evidence showed
that it was a grave question whether
the boards had been legally appointed;
that none of the boards except the
Second ward board had properly quail
fed as a board and as to quite a large
number of the members of the boards
that they either did MOI qualify at all
or that they did not qualify until their
duties were completed. AS to the Sec
ond and Fourth wards, that the regis
tration lists were not posted for six
days outside of the registration places
as required by law, and as to the Sec
ond, Third and Fourth wards, that the
lists had all been tempered with after
Thursday, the 9th day of March, on
trary to law. The court, in constituting
the law, said that the statute contem-
plates the appointment of the boards
by the city council. that. unless proper
notice to the public is then given by
the boards that they will not immedi-
ately proceed to the performance OF
their duties, they shall, the next ten
days following their appointment, reg
lister all persons as required by law, on
registration book, that they shall
then have one day in which to copy all
m onto a list which shall be on
the following six days publicly exposed
on the outside of lie building for the
purpose of inspection by the public,
when any person may object to any
one registered and then any n seeing
his name is not registered may apply
to the board to have it registered; and
at the end of said six days said list as
publicly exposed, shall be publicly re-
vised by the boards by emitting the
names of persons publicly stricken off
or added to the exposed lists. and in
no other manner, and delivered to the
city clerk for use on election day. In
summing up the law and the evidence
in this case the court said that the &C
ton of the several boards was illegal
as to certain specific facts shown by
the evidence, and to say the least,
showed gross carelessness on their
part. and as the plaintiffs acquiesced
in the contention of the defendants
that the period of registration COM
menced one week after the appoint
ment of the boards. he would so con-
strue the registration for this partic-
! ular election to come within the re-
! %auirements of the statute.