486 JOURNAL OF PROCEEDINGS [Feb. 26

effort to take any testimony whatsoever in the manner
required by law until February 10th, of the present year
and during our session. It will be seen by reference to
this testimony, that no attempt was made to produce
any ballots before the examining Justice of the Peace,
nor was there any notice whatsoever given to the con-
testee of any intention to produce such ballots. Never-
theless, at his request, an order was recommended by the
Committee on Elections to send for all of the ballots cast in
the election in Prince George's county, on November 7th
ast, and, acting upon this request, this Honorable Body or-
dered the production of said ballots before your Commit-
tee on Elections, and the same were counted before the
committee in a manner which will be referred to here-
after. An examination of the testimony taken by the
contestant will show the testimony was "only taken re-
garding six (6) districts in Prince George's county, and
yet the committee has undertaken to count the ballots in
all of the fifteen (15) districts of said county.

Moreover, there has been no testimony produced be-
fore the committee as to the qualifications of the contest-
ant, or his nomination for the position, nor, in fact, has
there even been filed with the committee a certified
copy of the result of the election in Prince George's
county on November 7th last, and so far as any legal
testimony regarding the same is concerned your commit-
tee has had none whatever before it.

Nevertheless, your committee has undertaken to make
a re-count of all the ballots cast at said election, al-
though no such re-count is allowed by the laws of this
State, and upon such re-count they have undertaken to
disqualify and throw out the ballots of 330 legally quali-
fied voters of Prince George's county. This has been
done in violation of the plain provisions of the election
law, which require that every ballot shall be counted ac-
cording to the intention of the voter. There is no
authority given under our law to refuse to count any
ballots which are marked so as to show the intention of
the voter, and, as a matter of law, the rejection of any
ballots which are properly marked can only be justified
upon the ground of fraud which has been committed
in marking the same, and that) said ballots were marked
for the purpose of identification. Not only does the tes-