Jennings

This is a contest for the office of supervisor in the county of San Mateo. The judgment ap-‘ *308 pealed from confirms the election of defendant. The appeal is from the judgment with a bill of exceptions.

In precinct No. 1 the record shows that one hundred and eighteen votes were counted without objection for contestant, gmd eleven votes -were objected to and reserved by counsel for respondent. One hundred and thirty-four votes were counted without objection for respondent, and nineteen votes were objected to by contestant. It subsequently appears-that all ballots were counted, and as counted the tally stood for Brown one hundred and fifty-four votes, for Jennings one hundred and twenty-eight. It is not expressly stated that the ballots objected to by respondent’s attorney were ballots for contestant, or that those objected to by contestant were cast for respondent-, but it would naturally be supposed that such was the case, and, if so, then the tally clerks must have made a wrong addition. .It should have been on that hypothesis one hundred and fifty-three for Brown and one hundred and twenty-nine for Jennings. This would have changed the result as finally declared.

The court…