Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1875-06-24
How Democrats Detraud the Bal.
lOt-BOX.

The News, echoing the New York
World, cites the following section of
the laws of New Hampshire as full
justification Of the action of the Can
vassing Board of that State in reject
ing certain ballots cast for a Republi-
can candidate for the Senate because
his Christian name was printed Matt.
instead of Nathaniel.
The full Christian and surname of
every person voted for, with the initial
letter or letters of the middle name,
and the usual authorizations for Junior.
second, third, and the like, shall be
written or printed upon every ballot
and every ballot not thus prepared aud
cast shall be regarded as blank and
not counted. .--.
1t cannot be denied that this Ian
guage is tolerably explicit j; but 1t
would SEEM that where the individual
for whom the ballots were meant to be
cast is absolutely identified, and where
he is designated by the name by which
he is commonly known, this section af-
fords no good reason for DISTINGUISHING
the voters by taking advantage of a
technical defect The Chicago Times
has the honesty so to regard it, and to
say that ''to argue otherwise is to over
look the essential substance matter and
bubble about the mere shape of the
symbols by which it is presented in
consciousness.
But waving this point, we ask The
News whether it believes it to be pro-
per proceeding for the New Hampshire
Canvassing Board to enforce this sec
ton literally as to Republican candi-
date, a nd to disregard it altogether as
to Democratic candidate. This is
exactly what the Board has done.
The Democratic candidate for Congress
in one of the districts of that State is
named Benjamin Franklin Jones A
number of ballots were cast for Frank
Jones" Now this was considerably
more serious departure from the re-
quirements of the statute than that il
the case of Head; the Christian name
was not given at all, nor even repre-
sented by an initial, and the middle
name was contracted. Besides, it is
quite supposable that there are other
Frank Joneses in the State, SO there
was no perfect Identification of the in
dividual. Nevertheless, this same
Canvassing Board counted these votes.
and gave the certificate to Jones'.
Therein we think they did quite right,
because their action gave effect to what
was doubtless the intention of the vot-
ers; and by the same reasoning we
think that they committed an infa-
nous outrage in rejecting the votes for
Head.
But let us return to the case of the
latter and pursue the inquiry a little
further. The laws of New Hampshire
require that the town officers shall
count the Votes and certify the result
to the Secretary of State, that the
Governor and his council shall examine
these returns, and that the Governor
''shall issue his summons to such per
sons as appear to be chosen senators
by majority of votes" Obviously
the Canvassing Boaad have no bust
ness with anything but the returns of
the town officers. In the case OF Head
these returns showed that ne had a
majority of votes. Iustead of issuing
the summons to him, and leaving all
other questions to be decided by the
Senate, which is expressly declared to
be the final judge of the elections, re-
turns aud qualifications of It's own
*