Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1880-04-02
TIE QUESTION OF THE BALLOT PAPER.


Francisco election is one which the Codes
throw good deal of light upon. In
Chapter s, Title II. Of the Political Code,
Section 1871, it is provided that " No
ticket must be used at any election, or
circulated on the day of election, unless
"Q) 1t is written or printed on paper
furnished by the Secretary of State, or
'supon paper in every respect precisely
like SUCH paper" Section ll9S provides
that the Secretary of State must provide
and keep constantly on hand sufficient
quantity of paper, uniform in color,
weight, texture and appearance. Sec
ton zoos provides that "when a ballot
% found in any ballot box does not conform
g to the requirements of Section ll9l, 1t
"must, with all its contents, be rejected.
In the present case it is asserted that the
ballots furnished by the Citizens Commit
tee were printed upon paper which was
not uniform in color, weight and texture
with the paper used by the Sandlotters,
and that the latter procured their
paper directly from the Secretary OF State
As the latter official states that he sold
no paper save to the Workingmen's agent,
for use at the late election, it may be
assumed without further argument that
the paper of the Citizens Committee was
procured of other dealers. The fact OF a
plainly distinguishable difference between
the two kinds of tickets appears to be ad-
mitted on both sides, and if there was no
such uniformity as the law expressly re-
quires, it follows that the ballots of the
Citizens Committee did not fulfill the
statutory requirements, and ought to have
been rejected by the Boards of Election.
The Boards of Election, however, did not
reject them, but accepted and counted
them, and therefore new question arises
here upon the effect of this action. A
matter-of -fact construction of the Code
provisions appears to justify the conclu-
sion that the absence of uniformity in the
Citizens ballots rendered them technically
illegal This, however, is by no means the
end of the case, for if this construction
were followed out it would obviously de-
mand the rejection OF the entire
Citizens vote. That no doubt is
what the Sandlotters would like, but it has
been decided by the Supreme Court of
this State that it is not permissible to
disfranchise citizens by Wholesale for tech
meal irregularities, and therefore there is
no ground for supposing that the Sandlot-
tiers can take anything by their protests at
that the vote of the majority can be multi
fed on any such showing it is none the
less apparent that the Citizens Committee
made gross and inexcusable blunder in
neglecting to make assurance doubly sure
as regarded the legality of their ballots.
1t is not likely that politicians would have
made such mistake as this, but the prob
ability is that some merchant in San Fran
cisco had quantity of ballot paper on
give the profit of the transaction to him
than to go direct to the Secretary of State.
The case, however, is full of complica-
tions, and some of its aspects tend to show
how difficult it is to carry out the provi
sions of such law as obtains here. Thus
it is said that there have been at least
three distinct qualities and shades of paper
purchased at different times by the Secre-
tary OF State. Now, while perhaps there
might be very little apparent difference be-
tween the first and the second lot, or be-
tween the second and the third lot, the
difference between the first and third may
easily have been so marked as to render
them plainly distinguishable, and this
appears to have been what actually
happened. 1t may therefore be al
legged that the Secretary of State,
in endeavoring to carry out the law,
himself produced the condition of things
which has resulted in It's violation.
Again, it must be realized that tinted
paper is very apt to undergo change of
color by keeping, or by exposure to the
light, so that between an old lot of paper
and new lot, both of which Were orig
inally the same color, there might be per-
ceptible difference. 1t is also quite con-
ceivable that difference of color-perception
La+,raa,, +,-o Soora+or;oe ~ S+o+o ,,,,or,,4
lead to the unconscious changing of the
tint of the ballot-paper. Thus a color
blind Secretary of State might produce
the most astonishing discords of tint, and
in all good faith SOW the seed for innumer-
able protests and proceedings, The en-
ployment of any coloring matter in the
paper used for ballots is probably
mistake. If the law provided the use
of white paper alone, merely stip-
ulating for uniformity in weight
and texture, no such confusion as the
late election gave rise to could
occur. Secretary Burns is said to have
expressed an intention to procure paper of
some odd tint, but We believe any tint
whatever is Objectionable, and provocative
of Just such embarrassments as this case
presents. The affair does not seem to bear
very important aspect, since it is evident
that the difference in the paper was acct
dental, and very probable that it grew out
of an inadvertence on the part OF the late
Secretary of State. The Sandlotters have
nothing to hope for from this attempt to
invalidate the election. and the only lesson
to be derived from the incident is the i'm
portance of framing laws so that their very
elaborateness does not render their defeat
at times unavoidable
A SEASON OF STRIKES.
A season of labor strikes has set in, and