Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1880-03-19
Democratic majority.
a SINGULAR AND SUSPICIOUS.


q SINGULAR AND SUSPICIOUS.
The testimony produces the conviction
that Mr.. Donnelly was sweeping the district
outside of Minneapolis and carrying all be-
fore him; that he was popular in Minneapo-
Lis, especially among the workingmen, and
that the workingmen constituted majority
of tn etotal population. That in this emerg-
ency the sitting member and his friends
formed conspiracy to arrest the tide of de-
feat by bribery and intimidation; and that
their last intrenchment was the seven pre-
clncts where, in effect, they made the work
ingmen vote UiUG 00ce for Washburn or take
the chances of starvation. And it is singu.
lar and suspicious circumstance that the vote
of two of these seven precincts, two pre-
cincts where Washburn claims FOG majority,
were not returned until eight days after the
election, although they should have been re-
turned on the morning after the election;
and then when they were returned one of
the two precincts is claimed for Washburn
by 483 majority, while one of the clerks of
the election therein, produced the original
tally-sheet of the election, showing but 26
majority for Washburn in that precinct in
stead of 483. See p. 271. And when the
consel for Washburn, in the performance of
his professional duty, subpoenaed the officers
in charge of the ballot-boxes to produce the
ballots of these precincts, knowing, as law
yer, that that was the best and therefore the
proper legal evidence of the actual vote cast,
and When the officers stood ready to have
the votes counted, the contestee held his
counsel back, and permitted the ballot boxes
to be returned unopened. Was this done
because he preferred to risk the throwing
out of FOG of his majority, rather than have
the secrets of those ballot-boxes, where the
votes had been numbered, revealed to the
public eye? What powerful motive could
have constrained him to such course?
In Williams vs. Stein, 80 Ind. Rep, D. 80, the
court hold that numbering of the votes cast
violates the secrecy of the ballot as much as if
the law had required the voters to vote giva
UoCe; and McCrary american Laws of Elec-
tions, sec. 1867 says: Votes must be cast in
the manner provided by law. Under a statute
requiring that the manner of voting shall be by
ballot, votes given aiUd Uoce cannot be counted"
Upon an elaborate review of the authorities
the conclusion is reached, upon what seems to
be good ground, that in this country the ballot
implies absolute and invlolsble secrecy, and
that this doctrine is founded in the highest
considerations of public policy. That the term
ballot implies secrecy, and that this mode of
voting was adopted mainly to enable each voter
to keep secret his vote is clear. lMcCrary ON
Elections, sec. 413, p liz, and authorities there
cited; Cooley. Constitutional Limitations, PIP.
506-7 and 604.
The chief reason for the general adoption of
the ballet in this country that it affords to
the voter the means of preserving the secrecy of
his vote. And this enables him to vote indie
pendently and freely, without being subject to
be overawed, inundated, or in any manner
controlled by others, to any i'll will or perse-
cution on account of his vote. The secret bal
lot is justly regarded as an important and valu-
able safeguard for the protection of the voter,
and particularly of the humble citizen against
the influence which wealth and station may be
supposed to exercise. ALI devices by
which the secrecy of the ballot is destroyed by
means of colored paper used for ballots, or by
other similar means, are exceedingly reprehen-
sible, and whether expressly prohibited by
statute or not, should be discountenanced by
all good citizens. (McCrary on Elections, sec.
1874; People vs. Pease, 81 N. Y, PIP. IS and 81. }
We have therefore reached the conclusion
that the votes cast in the seven precincts
where the ballots we're murdered should be
deducted, not alone because they were 80
numbered, but because such numbering was
corruptly done, with an intent to intimidate
the workingmen residing in those precincts;
and because it was part of general conspir-
acy of the friends and supporters of Mr.. |
Washburn to prevent free expression of
the preferences of the voters.