Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1878-08-15
tion Authors Classical Dictionary, title tabella;

ton Authors Classical Dictionary, title tabella;
10: title sufragism.
The revised statutes of Mass, oh. 1, SEQ. A.,
provide that the voter shall deposit his vote IN
the ballot-box in person; and it was formerly
enc custom in some,States to enclose the ballot
IN sealed envelope to be deposited by the
voter. The ballot shall be folded. No law
could compel an open vote.
These statutes and customs and texts Of law
may be regarded as declaratory of construc-
tion.
The law under which the election was held
May Z, 1873, vide Session Laws of 1878. General
Laws. Oh. "a, p. 1873, is invalid in many re-
spects.
Two of it's features, however, will be urged
and because they are fundamentally wrong
and perniciors
The law is invalid because it is not of gener-
al appllcation-relating only to incorporated
cities having over IL, 600 inhabitants, and prac-
tically affects but only the cities of st. Paul
and Minneapolis l cannot discover that any
milar law has been enacted. It is alt1u vires.
The Legislature cannot ernbarrass the franchise
Ut voting as it belongs 10 one citizen, or affect
tins right In manner not touching every
voter within the entire jurisdiction. Each cit
lien has equality of rights.
II such strain of legislative power were
admissible, where is the limit? The legisla-
tnre may with equal right enact that in all
cities Of $4,000 population or over the polls
at election shall be open for only one hour,
| OF make other impracticable DETERMINATIONS
Lhe effect of this very law has been seen 10
| make it impossible to poll a full vote at gen.
eral election with the resent polling PLACES.
| Sections and are more t}agrantly perni-
cious against the theory Of the vote by ball It
and attractive OF the express words of the con-
stitntion. They attack the very residence and
citadel of the elective franchise as guaranteed
to the voter. ballot means secret vote. To
translate the language Of Cicero allnding to
| = bot .bnT<. i l. l.. III
voters face but cannot uncover his miud.' The
sections referred 10 provide IN substance that
each clerk shall keep poll list, which sh IL
contain column headed number" another
| headed names of voters" The names of each
elector shall be ent red in regular succession
and the number of each voter placed opposite
| his name in the number column 1.-THE bal
lot shall be folded 10y the voter. 4 The
clerk of the election shall enter the name of
| the voter, and his number under the proper
heading in the poll book and the judges shall
endorse on the back of the ticket offered, the
number corresponding with the number of the
voter on the poll book, ETC."
| The barrier of secrecy is broken down. The
judges and the clerks have the keys.
| The reasons of this inviolability IRE we'll
given by Judge DEMO in The People VS.. Pease,
~ N. Y. page 81; II have already alluded to
the policy of the law providing for secret
ballot The right to vote in this manner has
| uoitdily DeeH considered an important and val
liable safeguard OF The independence of the
humble citizen against the influence which
wealth and station might be supposed to exer
else. This object would be accomplished bu,
very imperfecJly if the privacy supposed to be
secured was limited to the moment of deposit
ing the ballot. The spirit Of this system re
quires that the elector shall be secured then ant
aJ all tines thereafter. against reprnach OF
animadversion or any other prejudice OF
account of having voted according to his owl
unbiased judgment; and that security is made
to consist in shutting up Within the privacy oil
his own mind all knowledge of the manner il
which he has bestowed his suffrage"
assert after careful examination of botl
text books and cases, that the authorities rul
in al unbroken current against the validity o.
the provisions of the law of 1873.
Vide Cooley on Constitutional Limitations
PIP. qua, &c. &C., and notes.
AlcCleary's Law of Elections Secs 1914, &c
&c.
The constitution of Indiana is in the sam
words with ours. The legislature of that Stat
passed an act requiring ''he inspectors of an
election receiViny the ballot ot voter, to has
the same numbered on the outside or back thesee
to correspond NTH the number placed opposite til
name Of the roter ON the poll list"
Held. That such act was in violation o
that provision of the constitution, whic
declares that all elections by the peopl
shall be by ballot" and was therefore void
ballot implies absolute secrecy.
Vide SO Indiana, &C., found in 10th Am
Rep, 81.
!. Vide Williams vs. Stein.
Vide Temple vs. Mead Vt. SAL.
, Vide People VS.. Cicolte, 16 Mich, 2S3.
? So inviolable is tho privacy of the ballot tina
can lind no case when legal voter has bee
compelled to disclose how he voted even i
judicial inquiries. He may waive his priv
lege but cannot be forced to yiel0 it.
Vide authorities above cited.
Also Brightly's Leading Cases on Elections
PIP. $3.50, $40. Note 4OS.
Parsons Sen. Phila., Read vs.. Kreass.
Yeates Penn. &C.
Penn. 81.
Eaton Vs. Scott. l Cong. Elec. Cases, 1914.
l State Va. Helmanlet, % Wis, 426.
Cited in Brightly supra.
Finally, conceding that some of the provi.
q ions of this law may be defensible upon ground
OF public policy, the one am considering car
not be defended in either its principles, moral
or objects. Hon. man may have voted is ur
important to the public. Whether he is a less
voter or purely exercises his right is n matte
p OF great public concern. This law fuynishe
no aids or accessories of proof in solving til
latter inquiries. 1t simply establishes an il
. quest upon the mind of the voter which
: permitted by the constitution to be asanctuar,
y without other aim than to appease the curious
: : the querulous "r the disappointed.