Crowley. I think upon the last authority cited by
the counsel there is no defense in this case. It is entirely
clear that where there is a distinct judicial act, the party
performing the judicial act is not responsible, civilly or
criminally, unless corruption is proven, and in many cases when
corruption is not proven. But where the act is not judicial in
its character--where there is no discretion--then there is no
legal protection. That is the law as laid down in the authority
last quoted, and the authority quoted by Judge Selden in his
opinion. It is undoubtedly good law. They hold expressly in that
case that the inspectors are administrative officers, and not
judicial officers.

Now, this is the point in the case, in my view of it: If there
was any case in which a female was entitled to vote, then it
would be a subject of examination. If a female over the age of
twenty-one was entitled to vote, then it would be within the
judicial authority of the inspectors to examine and determine
whether in the given case the female came within that provision.
If a married woman was entitled to vote, or if a married woman
was not entitled to vote, and a single woman was entitled to
vote, I think the inspectors would have a right in a case before
them, to judge upon the evidence whether the person before them
was married or single. If they decided erroneously, their
judicial character would protect them. But under the law of this
State, as it stands, under no circumstances is a woman entitled
to vote. When Miss Anthony, Mrs. Leyden, and the other ladies
came there and presented themselves for registry, and presented
themselves to offer their votes, when it appeared that they were
women--that they were of the female sex--the power and authority
of the inspectors was at an end. When they act upon a subject
upon which they have no discretion, I think there is no judicial
authority. There is a large range of discretion in regard to the
votes offered by the male sex. If a man offers his vote, there is
a question whether he is a minor--whether he is twenty-one years
of age. The subject is within their jurisdiction. If they decide
correctly, it is well; if they decide erroneously, they act
judicially, and are not liable. If the question is whether the
per