Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1880-03-01
The Decision affirmed.

The case was appealed to the supreme
court by the city attorney, and on the 25th
of June, 1879, the decision of the lower
court was sustained by the highest tribunal
of the State. The decision was binding,
when made by the lower court, until it was
renewed, and the Minneapolis judges of
election deied it at their peril. The decision
was rendered by Justice Berry, but was con-
CURED in by the full bench, the entire num-
Der of judges being Republicans. The fol-
lowing is the decision in full:
john B. Brisbin, respondent, vs.. James Cleary,
Martin J.. Clum and Adolph Henschell, ap-
pellants.
Chapter "a, laws of 1878, being an act regu-
lating elections in incorporated cities of over
$4,000 inhabitants, after providing in section s
that the manner of voting at such elections shall
be by ballot, proceeds as follows: 1.-THE ballots
shall be folded by the voter and delivered to
one of the judges of election, who shall forth
with lay the same on the top of the ballot box,
at the same time in an audible voice proclaim
the name of the person Offering to vote to the
board; and if the judges be satisfied, according
to the evidence as herein described. that the
person Offering the vote is legal voter the
clerks of 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 vote on
the poll book, and shall Immediately put his
ticket in the ballot box"
Section 3, article viii, of the constitution of
this State, declares that "all elections shall be
by ballot, except for such town officers as may
be directed by law to be otherwise chosen"
As we ale of opinion that elections of city of.
hcers are not embraced in the exception in re-
gard to elections of town officers, the question
in this case is whether the provisions in regard
to the numbering of ballots is constitutional
The answer to this question depends upon what
is meant by voting by ballot. As in case of
words and phrases in general the meaning of
this phrase is arrived at by inquiring what it is
generally understood to mean; that is to say,
IN what sense it is commonly used by persons
who may be presumed to use the English Lam
guage correctly.
Such an inquiry shows that as applied to
elections of public officers voting by ballot sig
mites mode Of designating an electors choice
OF person for an Office by the deposit of a
ticket bearing the name of such person in re-
ceptacle provided for the purpose in such a
way as to secure the elector the privilege of
complete and inviolable secrecy in regard to
the person voted for. This privilege of Sc
crecy may properly be regarded as the distln-
gushing feature of ballot voting as compared
vOce.
The object of the privilege is the indepen-
dence of the voter. These views of the nature
of the vote by ballot, and its actions are sane
toned by Temple VS.. Mead, Vt. BAL; Com.
VS.. Troelper g 8. & B., 90; Kudar's case 2;
Parsons equity cases, 553; The people VS..
Cicott. l6 Mich, 283; People VS.. Pease, ~ N.
Y, opinion denio chief Justice; Williams vs.
Stein, 38 Ind, Sc; State VS.. Hilmantel, %
Wis, 422, COdy's constitutional limitations
6446, Brightby's Lea, case on elections, 376;
note McCrary's law of elections, sections 194,
1856, 400, Alb; encyclopedia Britannia, title
ballot
The statutory provisions with regard to the
numbering of tickets above quoted, clearly in
terferes with and violates the voters constitu-
tional privilege of secrecy. 1t is therefore
an unconstitutional provision. The voter can
not be required to submit to its application to
the ticket offered by him, and if upon refus-
ing to so submit he is debarred from voting, he
may maintain his action for damages against
the person debarring him.
IL is proper to add as having some tendency
to support the views to which we have arrived,
that the recent constitution of Pennsylvania
in 1878, of Missouri in 1875, and of Colorado
in 1876, expressly provides that while elections
shall be by ballot. the tickets shall be num-
bered upon plan similar to that prescribed by
our statutory provision above quoted. 1t is a
fair inference that this constitutional qualif-
cation of the right to vote by ballot was deem
ed necessary in order to authorize the number
ing provided for.
The defendants demurrer was properly over
ruled, and the order everything the same is &C
cordingly affirmed. BERRY, j.