In re Waters

The parties having agreed in open court that this appeal may be decided by a court of four justices, the decision is as follows: It was error for the court to refuse to rule on the testimony taken as to the forgeries. The board of elections did not have power to pass upon the alleged forgeries (Matter of Frankel v. Cheshire, 212 App. Div. 664), and a failure to file specifications with the board of elections did not deprive the Supreme Court of jurisdiction. It was also error for the court to have held that the petitions and certificates of designation in which alterations had been made were…