This is an action of contract on a bond, with specifications, to recover for expense incident to a recount of ballots in the City of Barre. The general issue was pleaded. The case was heard upon an agreed statement of facts and upon findings of fact made by the court judgment was rendered for the plaintiff. The case is here on the defendant’s exceptions to the judgment, so the only question presented is whether the judgment is supported by the facts found. Peck v. Patterson, 119 Vt 280,
The controversy in the present instance must be determined upon the construction of §20, of No. 304 of the Acts of 1955, entitled "An Act to Amend the Charter of the City of Barre,” providing for a recount of votes for certain candidates seeking election, reading in part as follows:
"Sec. 20. Any candidate for election for alderman, school commissioner or any other ward or city officer, or any twenty-five legal voters who are dissatis fed with the results of the count of the ballots by the inspectors of election and clerks of the several wards, may cause a recount to be had by serving written notice upon the city clerk specifically setting forth the grounds upon which he or they ask for a recount, and by furnishing good and sufficient bond to the satisfaction of the city clerk, that he or they will pay to the city all costs and expenses connected with said recount if the result of said recount is not in his or their favor. * * *”
The court found the following facts here material. At the annual municipal elections held in the City of Barre on the 4th day of March, 1958, the defendant was a candidate for the office of moderator receiving 1201 votes. H. William Scott also ran for this office and received 1411 votes. The
A "recount” is not a contest. It is an ascertainment of the result shown by the ballots. Goff v. Young, 61 W Va 693,
On the recount the tabulation of votes varied to some extent in several of the wards from the original count. The defendant urges that he has incurred no financial obligation to the City of Barre under the above charter provisions, contending, in substance, that any change in tiie recount or the tabulation of votes for or against him is sufficient to justify his position of non-liability for the expenses here claimed. This view is inconsistent with the manifest purpose of the charter provisions under consideration. No error appears.
Judgment affirmed.
