
    Fourth Appellate Department,
    January, 1900.
    Reported. 47 App. Div. 634.
    The People of the State of New York, ex rel. Luman W. Green, Appellant, v. Forest Holley and Others, as Inspectors of Election, Respondents.
    
      Ottoway & Munson, for appellant.
    The inspectors of election of the town of Westfield, Chautauqua -county, erroneously reported that the local option questions under section sixteen of the Liquor Tax Law, to regulate the traffic in liquors “ in said town,” had been submitted, stating .the result of such submission, whereas through a mistake of the clerk providing the local option ballots, another town was specified in such local option questions.
    Under the Election Law, inspectors of election are wholly ministerial officers. (People ex rel. Stapleton v. Bell, 119 N. Y. 185; Matter of Stuart, 24 App. Div. 212.)
    Where false return is made, through error or otherwise, the court must compel a true return; the writ of peremptory mandamus is the proper remedy. (Matter of Stuart, 155 N. Y. 548, 24 App. Div. 201-206; Gleason v. Blanc, 14 Misc. 620; People ex rel. Smith v. Scheillein, 95 N. Y. 124; People ex rel. Smithers v. Richmond, 25 N. Y. Supp. 144; People ex rel. White v. Aldermen, 31 App. Div. 446; People ex rel. Monroe v. Board of Canvassers, 
      129 N. Y. 469; People ex rel. Nichols v. Board of Canvassers, 129 N. Y. 401; People ex rel. Ranton v. Syracuse, 88 Hun, 208.)
    This remedy has been prescribed by this court. (People ex rel. Leonard v. Hamilton, 42 App. Div. 215.)
    
      Kingsbury & Kingsbury, for respondents.
    There being no proof that any voter was misled by the clerical error in the ballot, but rather undisputed proof to the contrary, the writ was properly denied. . (People ex rel. Hirsh v. Wood, 148 N. Y. 148; People ex rel. Leonard v. Hamilton, 42 App. Div. 212.)
   Order reversed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements, and writ of peremptory mandamus, as prayed for, granted.

All concurred.  