The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1905-12-06

According TO some OF Mr.. Hearsts law
yers. the Legislature could pass "A law
providing for Il general recanvass OF the
vote. which would not be unconstituuon-
al as retroactive legislation.
There is no precedent for it,. 50 far as
IS known, but certain OF the Hearst lead
ers have been saying that an appeal
would certainly be made 10 the legisla-
ture before they ended their efforts TO
seat Mr.. Hearst.
Whether or not they have had any con-
ference with the Republican leaders Is
not known, but there have been rumors
of IT. Such legislation would be almost in
the legislature itself, but subsequently IN
the courts.
Much OF the Hearst peoples present le-
gal program now hinges upon the dec!s-
ion which the appellate division Is eA-
pected TO hand down today on the gem
eral question OF whether or not ballot
boxes at this time can be reOpened and
votes and ballots thrown out
The entire question was up before the
appellate division for argument, because
OF an appeal which Corporation Counsel
Delaney decided To take from the whole
or Justice Amends order, by which Ger
tain ballot boxes were opened on Friday
night and the votes recounted, hut with
out any right OF rejecting ballots found
The Hearst people had appealed to the
higher court only from the last part of
the order prohibiting any ballots being
thrown out. or, i'm other worys, am actual
Austen O. Fox and Henry Yonge argued
the case OF the Hearst side and Judge
Parker for Mayor Mcclellan Assistant
Corporation Counsel Butts appeared Tor
the election officials.
No POWER IN ANY COURT
Judge Parker told The court that its
power TO compel the inspectors To per-
form a duty that they laled 10 per
form on election night that duty being
10 recount the votes when their taliS
sheer showed an error could not be called
into controversy.
But" said he you cannot compel
them by maudamus TO exercise over again
their judicial discretion No power 20 DO
that rests with any court
Judge Parker read "A statement made
by Mr. Sheern describing the number or
orders and summonses necessary I'm the
Hearst program. lie said that II could
be easily seen that this could he made
TO stretch over six months and certainly
could not be done by Jan.
Their remedy. he said. was quo war
ranto proceeding, which would have i'm
voted the whole question, and In which
every ballot box could be brought in as
evidence.
The Hearst lawyers argument was
generally to the effect th1t-t44~- courts
could not compel the inspectors TO COM
init over again a crime.
Mr.. Gonge started 10 object to Judge
Parker's reference 10 the job that the
courts might have but Presiding Justice
OBrien cut him short by saying: III
the election law requires us 10 order y
recount of the whole thing we viii have
10 do IL. That is all there is TO tt
Mr.. Fox closed tho argument for the
Hearst side.
Justice OBrien would not allow the
lawyers 10 hand I'm briefs by today. tie
said that. owing 10 the nearness OF Jan.
!, the case ought 20 be finished the day
IL was argued.
The lawyers said they expected a decis-
ion by clock today. An appeal may be
taken. but this has not been decided
The board Of elections as city canvass
ers met again yesterday, as required un-
der the law, and received no returns. The
board sent notices 20 the several county