. Voting in the field; a forgotten chapter of the civil war . d the judges then were to appoint twoperspns present to act as clerks of the election. Thejudges and clerks were to take and subscribe an oathfaithfully to execute the act. The further provisionswere for poll books, for manner of voting, canvassing,and returning and counting votes.^ At the October election, 1863, the validity of thisact was brought in question. There were two can-didates for the office of Probate Judge. The canvass-ing board included the votes cast by soldiers out ofthe State in its canvass, and declared the candida
. Voting in the field; a forgotten chapter of the civil war . d the judges then were to appoint twoperspns present to act as clerks of the election. Thejudges and clerks were to take and subscribe an oathfaithfully to execute the act. The further provisionswere for poll books, for manner of voting, canvassing,and returning and counting votes.^ At the October election, 1863, the validity of thisact was brought in question. There were two can-didates for the office of Probate Judge. The canvass-ing board included the votes cast by soldiers out ofthe State in its canvass, and declared the candidatewho received the majority upon that canvass to beelected. The defeated candidate brought the casebefore the Court of Common Pleas, claiming thatvotes cast by soldiers out of the State could not becounted, and that therefore he was elected. ThatCourt held the act of 1863 unconstitutional, so far 1 House Journal, 1863, pp. 80, 81, 207. 229, 526, 537, 53«, 542, 552, 558, 561,584; Senate Journal, pp. 62, 74, 75, 171, 337.* General Laws, Vol. 60, 1863, p. J^l^t^<r3fi-^^-i^y^^ OHIO 75 as it provided for voting outside of the State, andthat all votes polled under the provisions ofthe act outside of the State of Ohio were illegal,void and to be held for naught. It excluded fromthe canvass all the votes cast out of the State anddeclared the defeated candidate elected. Thereuponthe other candidate took the case to the SupremeCourt upon exceptions, and it was there argued anddecided at the December term, 1863.^ The case was deemed very important, and all thearguments as well as the opinions are reported. Itoccupies 162 printed pages of the report. The opinionwas written by Scott, J., and was concurred in byBrinkerhoff, C. J., and Wilder and White, J J. Itwas claimed that there was a want of power in theLegislature to give an extra-territorial effect to anyof its statutes. The argument in brief was that thepeople of the State in their collective capacity neverpossessed such a po
Size: 1521px × 1643px
Photo credit: © Reading Room 2020 / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookcentury1900, bookdecade1910, bookidvotinginfiel, bookyear1915
