Show THECASK A < UXST THE Ems TRAILS TJIE decision of the ttah Com mifleu leaves in gnat doubt the question How far may a gistra lon officer go in a direction at variance with the spirit and letter of the law without being in danger of removal Ouilttiug Orltug mention of McCallum Wilt and Morris I > wa abundantly shown that Mr Clute and Mr Hyains bal disregarded disre-garded the explicit provisions of the law and hail been guilty conduct ofnn extraordinary character in I ofllcer who is under sacred obligations obliga-tions to act with fidelity aol impartiality impar-tiality I was shown that Mr Chute liad I pursued a very erratic course in making the house t house canvass I of his precinct that he lisd devoted i much 7 his time to other matters hi I I t tau tlie canvass during the r < rloi in which it should have teen ae tivclyprosecuted that be had discriminated dis-criminated in many instances in I registering some applicants aud refusing re-fusing olhcrsand that hehadutterly failed to make any canvass at all of considerable portion of hb district which were thickly inhabited by Peoples Party men paying no regard gal to the provisions of the law which required him to make a diligent dili-gent and complete house to house visitation One fact was proven against Mr Chute and no denied by hilrnw hlh alone ought to have been deemed ample cause for his removal He liad visited the Iremises of the llio Qraude Western Itailway Company and had found there large numbers of workmen whom Ie had registered reg-istered knowing that they were all members of his own party without making any attempt t find their homes and thereby ascertain that they lived in his precinct e he continually refuted to register Peoples Party len anywhere except ex-cept at their homes Inn coutcct as clo e as the coming municipal election elec-tion such acts of discrimination might easily give the victory t the minority The derelictu ° shown t exist on the part of Hyams were still more flagrant They were proven by lib own testimony When on the stand lie did not IJ having taken the ositlou that it was umuftxary for him to visit the houses of his district dis-trict nor did he deny that he had utterly failed to visit whole blocks He further admitted that he hail registered hundreds of furl without gulng to their home but that he liad uniformly refused to do the same thing with Peoples Party IIl His attempt at palliating such flagrant discrimination wa of a character to increase his ollenstf He nM he registered regis-tered Libcrali because he knew them and refud 1 Peoples Party men because he did not know them He thus added to the statutory statu-tory qualifications of an applicant for registration the condition of a personal acquaintance with himself I Hyams did not deserve to be removed what could ho have done to make his iliimlsal 1 projier and necet ry The tleciion of the Commission fays that the registrars did n absolutely deny any electoral elector-al rights t voters This they did not have the tower nor opportunity t do The tiling was imjiasible for them to accomplish but Hymns went as far in that direction as he well multI so I I was abundantly howu and not l denied nor palliated l that each of the registrars had usurped judicial l functions in permitting ieronc to take the oath or ic denying them I that privilege Their attorney in I the arguments actually and un hAuntingly held that i was right proper nod even necessary that thev should do this yet their asumption of such powers was alone ample ground for their dismissal iu view of the explicit language of the law and the mandamus decision of Judge Xanc Every one of the registrars ought on the showing made to have been removed They were l proven guilty of discrimination intolerable in ollicers performing their function func-tion aud it I was not even denied by them that they had usurped powers belonging only to curs In refusing refus-ing to dismiss any of them the Commission Com-mission Ira virtually endorsed the conduct of all of them |