Show JUDGE DABTOITS RVLThGS The ruling of Judge Bartch In the I mandamus part of the Third precinct case was ar surprise to many people Nevertheless It Is clearly right Of course The Herald regards It in that light because it confirms our views of the matter in question freely espr seed s-eed when ihe intermediate board of canvassers appointed under Judge 2artchs mistaken ruling narrowed their recount to the voe for two of the candidates instead of extending it to all who were on the same ticket The Judge decides that under the rulIng rul-Ing of the Supreme Court the Utah Commission have the right to count the ballots of the Third precinct and In reference to all the candidates in that precinct for the office of delegate to the constitutional convention His reasoning on the matter is clear and his decision the logical conclusion But in hi < peculiar fashion the judge turn round and hears testimony on he application for a writ of prohibition to stop the very thing which by his own ruling the Commission have the right and are in duty bound to perform per-form Suppose he grants the writ He then prohibits the Commission from discharging heir duty and the con seqence must be a failuve to grant certificates to the persons whom the ballots alight have shown to have been elected I I SQ will not require the Commission to Issue certificates on the lace of the returns he will prohIbit them from counting the ballots so as to find out who Is lawfully elected and Issue cer ttncates accordingly So the result will be no canvass no certificates That Is of course If he decides to grant the writ If he refuses to issue I the writ of prohibition then the Commission Com-mission will go ahead and make the i canvass as the law requires But it is clear that the judge has made a mistake mis-take Having refused the mandamus the prohibition naturally fell down with it If the Commission on 1 canvassing can-vassing the votes should issue certificates certifi-cates to persons on what may be claimed fraudulent ballots the injured candidates would have their remedy in a contest Phe judge is proceeding just as though it was a case of contest he had to try Instead of an application for a writ which It would be Inconsistent Inconsis-tent to grant in view of his decision on the mandamus In whatever way he may decide and however right it may be under proper proceedings to bring out all there is ot apparent crookedness in reference to the election the hearing of the matter under the present application is a judicial ju-dicial inconsistency that must be evident evi-dent to every legal mind |