Evening journal., 1908-10-29
RECALLS KENT
COUNTY FRAUD
John ". SheIdrake, Demo-
cratic Candidate for Senator,
Vas on 1896 Returning Board
REPUBLICANS WERE
ROBBED OF VICTORY

Special 10 THE EVENING JOURNAL.
DOVER. Del. oct 27.-The Democratic
party IN Kent county has nominated for
the candidate of that party for the Of
flee Of Senator in the General Assem-
bly, from senatorial district No. four in
Kent county. John w. SheldraKe.
In the year 1895 John W. Sheldrake
was the Inspector of election at the gem
eral election of that year in election
district No /. Of MispiIion hundred, and
one of the defendants in the celebrated
mandamus suit brought by the Repubh-
cans against the returning board of Kent
county in 1896. he, being member Of that
returning board.
1t will be recalled that the returning
board in Kent county in that year threw
out the certificates of the election in all
the election districts which showed a lie
publican majority.
The Legislature of 1897. Zone senator and
seven representatives. members thei eof,
having been certified in the manner
above. as elected in Kent county,. passed
law abolishing the old board Of canvass.
In the suit mentioned. the Democratic de-
PENDANTS, called the respondents in that
case, set up as part OF their defense, the
above act.
The Republicans replied thereto. that
the act was unconstitutional as far as IL
purported to affect the General Election
of 1896 The Democrats rejoined that the
act was constitutional In that case which
was entitled, the state Of Delaware on
the relation Of Samuel l.. Shaw VS.
Thomas Mccoy. John w. Sheldrake and
others, constituting the old returning
board Of Kent county. the Superior Court
OF that county in passing on the consti'
tutionality of the act mentioned and
especially on the contention Of the Demo.
Gratis. that the act was constitutional
speaking through Chief Justice Lore
said. on the Sixth day OF May. A. d.. 1897
admit the construction claimed thai
the Legislature may thus annul an elec
ton and where does it lead us? The peo
pie at the polls may defeat the party II
power by a decisive majority, but stil
leave the election machinery in the hand
OF the defeated party. In aseertaining th'
election results the defeated party ma.
count only such returns as are faNorabl
to it's continuance in power; may unlaw
fully certify such finding; and give certi
fcates in pursuance thereof. When pro
ceedings are instituted in Court @
Justice to ascertain and enforce the yer
dict Of the people, 1t may then resort {
technical subterfuges. writs OF error, an
all other dilatory methods known TO a'
complished advocates. or within the rams
OF acute politicians. and thereby delay
final decision until the time TO reap th
fruits Of the election has come an
passed: then the candidates defeated
the polls, clothed with Illegal certificate
may take their seats without inquiry an
become Reconstructed judges Of the
own cases. They may then pass a. la
to smother all inquiry as TO the result
the election. This too in the name Of la
and under the shadow OF the temple {
| Justice. Can we conceive a case wher'
! in the language Of one of the masters
our tongue. the laws delay and the II
science OF office could more ruthlessly Sc