tificate thus commencing proceeds to declare
that " we did then act as judges of election
at an election then held at the quarters of the
commanding officer,' ' and the necessary pre-
sumption and intendment coming in aid of
all these general averments, if any aid is ne-
cessary, supply all that is necessary to show
that, so acting as judges, they acted by com-
petent authority. Were it not so it would be
difficult to find any returns from any county
in the State at this or any other election on
file in this office that would not be obnoxious
to the same or much graver objections. In-
deed, the learned counsel who has presented
these objections has been himself obliged to
rely upon presumptions to supply defects in
returns from several counties casting large
majorities against the constitution, which
have been made subjects of exception by the
opposing counsel, and which I think furnish
examples of irregularities quite as important,
to say the least of them, as most of those
suggested against the sufficiency of the mili-
tary returns. Several of these make no state-
ment of the time during which the polls were
opened; in two cases they fail to show that
the vote was by ballot—in one, instead of posi-
tively certifying, as they are required so ex-
plicitly to do, that every voter has taken the
oath prescribed by the constitution, they only
certify in the way of preamble that it so ap-
pears from the certificates made out at the
district polls; and in another county the re-
turns, instead of being made and directed to
the governor, are made and directed to the
clerk of the circuit court, and a certified copy
enclosed by that officer. But I am of opinion
that these returns being substantially correct,
are entitled to the benefit of all reasonable
presumptions to cure their defects; and sure-
ly, returns made in the field, and by officers
who, as well as the county judges, are sworn
to observe the law, ought not to be subject to
anymore rigid scrutiny.
The circumstances under which they were
prepared entitle them to the most liberal
construction, and the convention very justly
looked to these circumstances in providing,
as they did against all unimportant irregu-
larities, by declaring "that no particular
words shall be required."
I proceed to a brief notice of some particu-
lar objections applied to different returns of
several companies, which, whilst they are gen-
erally, I think, within the reasons suggested
against other objections taken, it may be
proper to advert to, as they were of a more
special description. The vote of company B
of 2d regiment of infantry, is objected to on
the ground that the caption to the list of vo-
ters accompanying the return represents that
the polls were opened at the quarters of" the
judges." Adverting to the certificate of re-
turn itself, it will be found to recite that the
election was "held at the quarters of the
commanding officer of said company "—and |
whilst the list of votes accompanying that
certificate might be admitted to explain any
ambiguity on its face, it cannot, without the
signature of any official, be allowed to con-
tradict the regular certificate of the judges
made out under their hand and seal.
Objection is taken to the returns of com-
pany C, of 12th regiment infantry, upon the
ground that it appears by a letter accompa-
nying the return, that the polls were not
opened until after the appointed hour, eight
o'clock, A, M. The captain, however, dis-
tinctly states that though not opened at the
hour required, ' 'abundant time and oppor-
tunity were given to secure the entire vote of
the company"—afact that can scarcely be
doubted when we perceive that the company
polled twenty-three votes, and no other in the
regiment, though apparently with the poll
opened during the whole time required, voted
more than twenty-eight. Under such cir-
cumstances, and with no complaint made that
any member of the company lost his vote by
reason of the delay, it would seem to be a
. most harsh and unreasonable proceeding to
refuse to count the votes that were given.
This view of the case is sustained too by the
authority of the writer already quoted, who
enumerates, among the irregularities insuffi-
cient to invalidate the proceedings, a case
' 'where the opening of the meeting was de-
layed for two hours beyond the time fixed."
The vote of company K, 1st regiment, P. H.
B., is objected to on the ground that others
not members of that company voted with it.
The certificate of the judges show no such
fact, but states the election to have been by the
members of company K, lout a letter accom-
panying it states that "the accompanying
list of voters consist of members of company
K, and a detachment of companies A, C and
F, of same regiment, serving under the com-
mand of the officers of company K, the officers
of companies A, C and F. having been mus-
tered out of service." These men, therefore,
were incorporated into company K. Com-
panies A, C and F cast no vote, and these
members of said companies, consolidated ap-
parently with company K, had a right to
vote at the quarters of that company, and
even if they had not it would be as unrea-
sonable to reject the whole vote of the com-
pany on such account as it would be to reject
the vote of an entire election district because
its poll-books showed that sundry illegal
voters had participated in the election.
Objection is made to company H, 1st Poto-
mac Home Brigade, upon the ground that
twenty-three "blue tickets" are returned
with the ballots, which I am asked to reject.
The objection is founded on the 9th section
of the act of 1864, providing for the call of
the convention, which directs that the ballots
"shall be written or printed on white paper,"
The paper on which these twenty-three bal-
lots were written is what is commonly known |
