Elections — Contest — Recounting 'Ballots—Presumption.—Where ballots- from a precinct have been counted before the court in an election contest, they become a .part of the record of the contest, and, in view of the presumption that official duty has been regularly performed, raised by Code of Civil Procedure, section 1963, subdivision 15, they are presumed to have been -properly safeguarded by the clerk of the court and preserved intact and in the same condition in which they were found by the court when first taken out of the sealed package and counted, and in the absence of anything in the record to dispel this .presumption, the trial court does not commit error -by overruling objections to the recounting of the ballots.

Id.—Recounting of Ballots not Prohibited—Powers of Court.—If the trial court by which an election contest is heard is not satisfied with a count of the ballots before it, there is no reason, legislative or judicial, why it may not cause such ballots to be counted again so as to satisfy itself that no mistake has been made before it in the counting.

Id.—Ballots—Marks not Identifying.—Where some of the ballots are marked in the voting spaces with crosses larger than those ordinarily used at elections and appearing as though they might have been made with the blunt end of some article like a pen or pencil-holder, but there is no evidence disclosing the size or character of the stamp supplied by the election officers, and no evidence extrinsic to the ballots themselves showing or tending to show that the manner of marking the ballots was intended -by the voters as a means of facilitating an identification of the ballots, it cannot be said that the rulings of the trial court allowing them to be counted were erroneous.

Id.—Marks Caused by “Offset" in Folding.—A mark in the form of the upper half of a cross made apparently by an offset from . folding the ballot when the stamping ink was not dry does not require the rejection of a ballot.

Id.—Crosses Opposite Names of Two Opposing Candidates.—A ballot showing crosses opposite the names of two opposing candidates is properly not counted for either.

Id.—Impression Caused Probably by Offset.—Where a ballot was distinctly marked with a cross opposite the name of one candidate but there was a slight impression opposite the name of the other candidate, which might have been due to an offset in folding, it was not error to count the ballot in accordance with- the distinct impression.

lb.—Marks not Intended for Identification.—Where a ballot was marked with a cross in the printed space for the name of a candidate and also in the voting space opposite the same candidate’s name, but there was nothing to indicate that the former mark was intended as an identification mark, the ballot was properly counted.

Id.—Possible Errors Offsetting Each Other.—Where the rejection by the court of a ballot for the successful candidate was equalized by the rejection of a ballet for the contestant similarly marked, the possible errors offsetting'each other are unnecessary to be considered.