The Montgomery advertiser., 1905-11-22
W. E. HENRY IS UPHELD
CASE FROM sT. CLAIR COUNTY IS
 DECIDED.
Ahe Aiabama Supreme Court Opinion Sets at Rest Controversy over
 Election of . Tax
 Collector.

w. F. Henry was upheld as the Tax Collector of St. Clair County yesteroay by the Supreme Court of Aianama' which had been called upon to decide whether the office belonged 70 nm or to c. c. Montgomery, his opponent m the election held last November. The contest was waged by MT. Montgomery ton an agreed statement of facts.
 There was no hint of fraud, and IL was understood that the contestants counsel was not to allege any taint upon the election. The whole contro- versy hung around the point as 70 whether unn numbered ballots cast in the election for the office last year should be legally counted or figure in the result. There were four precincts in St. Clair County where the election officers neg lected to number the ballots according to the general election law.
 It was claimed by MT. Montgomery that if these ballots should be counted out. as they ought to be, he argued his election would be assured ana MT. Henry would have to give up the of- flee. MT. Henry had been declared elecfed by the returns which were can- vasled by the Board of Supervisors of the county. This was done in the face of the objections raised by the support CTS of MT. Montgomery. The contest was carried to the Judge of Probate, who decided on the same agreed state ment of facts as we presented to the Supreme Court that MT. Henry was en- titled to the office.
 The votes numbered and unnum- bered, that were cast for the Tax Col lector in St. Clair County were 976 for MT Henry and 963 for MT. Montgomery.
 The Supreme Court. in an opinion handed down yesterday written by MT. Associate Justice N. D. Denson, decided the provision of the election law re-
 Fniring the ballots to be numbered is directory and not mandatory. As rule of construction in the case of elec- ton contests is to give the benefit Of all doubts to the party for whom the ballots were cast, 1t was decided that the will of the majority was expressed in favor of MT. Henry, the appellee. The office was, therefore, conferred upon him in justice, according to the opin- ion of Justice Denson. The opinion cites authorities of-Supreme Courts in other States of the Union which tend ed to favor the candidate when no law of a mandatory nature was violated. The opinion covers nearly nine pages of typewritten paper.
 "In the case at bar," says Justice Denson, mo complaint is made with reference to the conduct of any elec- tor, but it is on account of the inad- VeFIence or tHe lHspeChOTo thdb ShO contestant would have votes of four precincts in the county rejected and the will of the majority of the county (conceded to have been fairly and hon estly expressed) thwarted. While 1t is well enough to insist on a proper and strict performance of duty by officers conducting elections, and to have been regular, the officers should have fol- lowed the letter of the law in this in- stance, yet the Legislature not having declared irregularities like the one complained of in this case fatal, we conclude that the provision of the law with reference to numbering the bal lots pertaining, as 1t does, to the mode of procedure in the election, is direc- tory and not mandatory"
 The act of the Legislature known as the general election law was passed in the session of 1902-1903, and. the provision about numbering ballots is Hound in Sections 34 1-2 and 7S. It simply requires that the ballot when cast shall be numbered to correspond with the number of the voter on the reOtgtNr 2