Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1880-04-02
coscEasISe BALLOT PAPER.

The slieht difference OF tint in the
ballot paper used at the recent San Fran
cisco election was not sufficient to eIsr-
else any detrimental influence or have
n definite influence over the result.
In fact it was principally noticeable to
the excited imagination. The leaders OF
the workinsmen's Party happened to
notice that the ballots cast by the Citi-
zens' Union voters we're q shade lighter
than theirs. and at oncs concluded that
anybody keeping private tally lists near
the polls were smissaries Of tbs Citizens
Union stationed there to forecast the
result BY means Of this distinction in
shade, and also to intimidats the Work
ingmen voters. They complained to
the Election Commissioner. who at
onse instructed the police to arrest all
such parties at any Of the election pre-
cincts Of the city or county who were
then found checking OF the political
complexion Of the vote pollsd BY means
Of the complexion Of the ballots. and
Whatever advantage may have been thus
gained was promptly annulled and put q
stop to. Both or all parties at any cleo.
ton have men thus stationed at the
polls to keep run n far a. possible OF
how the election il going as far as they
are enabled to judge from knowledge Of
the voters. therefore there was nothing
unusual in this matter. An attempt to
throw out the votes Of the citizens on
this slight prsteIt would naturally create
Q riot.
AL printers and dealers in paper are
familiar with the fact that there 10 fire.
quently . slight variation in shade in
the same quality and style Of paper. and
that portions Of tn, same lot. even. kept
in different locations. are liable to show
change u shade. Both parties in this
instance w,rs we'll acquainted with the
provisions and regulations Of the law.
and neither woull be foolish enough to
risk suy known violation Of it. That
fact Is apparent enough upon its face.
The Sacramento Bee. commenting upon
this subject. says:
Deputy Secretary Of State Reynolds
states that NO paper was purchased from
that office for use At the San Francisco
election except what the workingmen's
committee purchased. Hence, II there
Was any difference In the ballots used by
the respective factions. that which was
NOT Of the legal color must have been pur-
chased from tho San Francisco dealers. 1t
10 no proof, however, that there was . mo-
tive in using paper that was OF color, a. ii
Is to the interest Of all parties to conform
TO the law. The fact Is, IL 10 difficult to
ind any two lots Of ball It paper, purchased
at different times in the East, Of the same
tint. That which the Secretary OF State
purchases today will probably be several
shades lighter within six months. and
when sold with new lots just from the
mill IL will not compare well in color.
Moreover. that officer has to do the best
he can. aud II he orders . supply for an
approaching election. and IL should not
conform exactly to that which he had sold
from . former lot. there is no help for 10.
At the late city election hero the ballots
were OF different tints, and yet there was
NO suspicion Of fraud on the part Of any
one. The law. to 10 sure, requires that
-