Early Governors' Papers

Winchester May 29 1822

Dr Sir

An Election took place here yesterday for Sheriff of this County which has excited much interest here amongst the friends of the Candidates. This Election will be contested, and you as^are the umpire - The matter was argued by the Attorney in Court & the result was that a record of the whole proceedings should be sent to you. I was employed as one of Capt Hunts ^Counsel and the exemplification which I shall here offer of the Record you will consider as offered by me in my professional character.

By reference to the "Record" you will perceive that an election took place yesterday at one oClock - that there were 30 Magistrates present — that Gray had 15 Votes and that Hunt had 15 Votes - and that then the Chairman of the Court gave the casting vote and gave that vote in favor of Hunt - whereupon he was proclaimd by order of the Court of the cryer of the Court as Sheriff for the ensuing two years - Grays friends object to this election upon these grounds; that the Chairman first voted as a common Magistrate and then on the tie as Chairman thereby giveing [sic] two votes — To this we contend that the Chairman in the first place had a right to vote because the Constitution says the Sheriff shall be elected by the Magistrates of the County - and he is a Magistrate. [Wld?] if there be an equality of votes N neither the Constitution nor the Statute, point out

P.S. Since writing the foregoing the Court met today and Capt Hunts counsel moved the Court to receive his Bond. The Court did so - His counsel then moved the Court to allow Capt Hunt to be sworn in as Sheriff of this County - The Court consented and he was accordingly sworn in as Sheriff of this County for the ensuing two years — On this occasion 18 magistrates were present and voted — Two Sheriffs have been therefore qualified and it is for you to say which is to receive the Commission at your hands — I will add one point which I heretofore omitted - It is this — Hunt was at the first election declared duly elected & it was entered on the records Consequently Hunt was then invested with a right which the Court subsequently had no right of which the Court could not subsequently diverted. It is true that when a court passes an order about any suit or the like it may before the minutes are signed annul it - but when the Court invests a man with a right — the right for instance to enjoy an office — that right the Court cannot take from him unless he commits some act which would subject him to that penalty — The