Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1888-11-23

l
| listened To the reading of volumnous
dispositions, aud the arguments of coun-
sci, and after the most careful eXamiua-
non OF the evidence and of the law, have
unanimously agreed to report as follows :
AT the last freeman's meeting in the
town OF Underhill, there were three can
| dldatee for the Office o town representa-
| tive. Only one ballot was had and the
Following result was announced by the
presiding officer:
Whole number Of votes caSt........339
Necessary for choice..............l10
George w. WOodworth. ...................i 72
luOubs ileeNcS. .s.....s.. loo
george Benedict. Observation-Disclosures. ..... l.
Thereupon George w. Woodwork was
declared elected and the proper certificate
OF election was given him. II appeared
| from the evidence, and the committee find
I that during the progress of the balloting
SIX votes were challenged on behalf of
Mr.. Reeves, and that thee six votes were
sealed up In as many envelopes, and dc
posted in the state box. The representa-
| i've box was turned at O'Clock. and the
count of the representative vote began.
At or about this time the six challenged
votes were taken from the State box, en-
VelOpeS opened and the six votes were
/ found TO be for WoodWorth and were
| counted for him. At the same time live
other representative votes found loose in
the State box, viz one tor Woodwork,
one for Benedict, and three for Reeves.
v
for him, making his l.2 votes, but the one
vote for Benedict was not counted Tor
! Benedict, and the three votes for Reeves
were not counted for Reeves. The com
mittee also find that when the State votes
were counted ut o clock one other repre-
sentative vote was found N the State box
for WoodwDrtb. The check list shows
that 3i3 names were checked and one man
: whose name was not checked IS known to
have voted for representative. Therefore
counting all the votes found III the repre-
sentative box aud all the votes found in
the state box Including the last one
found at > o'clock, the total number of
( ballots cast corresponds exactly with the
check list when corrected as to the one
named, to wit-344 OF this number the
committee tind that
Woodwork received ........ ... ...........1 73
Reeves reCciV d................... los
Benedict received. ....... .,....,............l3
and the committee are of the opinion that
II these votes were cast by legal voters
aud IN eGal way, they should be ac-
counted rs above stated
AS to the question whether representa-
| tive votes found in the State box should
I he counted, the committee are clearly of
the opinion that trey should BE so count
ed, if placed in the wrong box by accident
or mistake, and were cast 10y legal voters
/ in good faith NcCreary on elections, sec.
! Is ct SCQ-nl It is a rule well grounded in
| justice and reaso and well established
| by authority and precedent, hat tine
! voter shall not be deprived OF his rights
rs an elector, either by the fraud or the
! mistake of the election officer, If IL is posi-
/ ole to prevent il IL is safe to say
! hat a mistake will always be corrected if
! 1t can be corrected, and therefore the pur
( pose of the party seeking TO get the bene-
! fit OF ballots cast into the wrong box
! should be 10 prove that they were good
/ and honest ballots and were placed there
! by mistake or without his fault. Wherever
| this is clearly shown, the mistake may
! be corrected, il not by the officers of the
! election at least by the tribunal trying the
| contest In determining this and
! similar questions, in cases OF contested
! elections il should he kept constantly in
mind that the ultimate purpose of the
| proceeding 10 to ascertain aud give eX-
| preston to the will of the majority as eX-
| pressed through the ballot box and ac-
cord'ng to law. Rules should he
adopted and construed to this end,
aud to this end only. The view here.
in expressed is fully confirmed by the
! decision OF tie Supreme Court of Mich
gan in people w. Bates, 18th MICHIGAN
| 1872 In that case il was held that an cleo
o. is not TO be deprived of his vote either
! by the fraud or pliStake of an inspector
/ Il GepOsitiug il in the wrong box if the
| Intention Of the voter can be ascertained
I with reason and certainty; nor should
I
/ in the wrong box by the honest mistake
| Ot the voters themselves in that case a
/ state and city election were both held at
The same time ann place under the charge
of the same officers, and seven ballots for
/ city officers were found ri the closing Of
| he pole in the State box the eirCuul-
stances Of the case made II in the opiuion
OF the court reasonably certain that these
ballots were in good faith put it by cleo
tors, aud they were accordingly counted. "
The contestants however, Including the
six votes challenged on election day, cues
| toned the right Of the following persons
TO vote for representative. viz James
Wall, w. f. Hall. James Connors, Fred
! HOrner, Alexander NeYlns, George Vim.
cent, Arthur Mullip. Peter McNsssar,
John W. Casey, John titzsimonds, Fred
| NARROW, Thomas Shannon and f. J
johnson. OF this number the mttee
iiud thar Peter McNassar was not resi-
deut of Uudernlll within the meaning OF
the law, and therefore not 4 legal voter
that Arthur Mullin had not taken the
freeman's oath, and therefore was not q
,eRal voter, and that George Vincent was
not 81 years OF age and therefore not d
Legal voter.
Ia the case OF Fred Horner it appeared
hat he became OF age before the check
list was completed and In tact before the
list was posted, and that his name was
placed upon the check list as it first ap
!
freeman y oatn, aud before the board OF
civil authority saturday night he was
challenged on that ground. The board
however, refused TO strike off his name
| because it WAS claimed that he had right
to appear aud take the oath at any time
before ~ O'Clock. He did not appear and
then 1t was claimed that the board had M
rightto shike his name off after II O'clock
His name WAS therefore retained upon the
list and tde lreeman's oath was admins
tered to him Oh election dag and he voted
The State prescrlDes iSec 50 X. L., q.
amended by Sec, g. No, 60, public acts o.
1851 that the seectmen shall make n
alphabetical list Of the persons qualified
TO voto. The first error, therefore, was /,
placing HOrner's name upon the list at all
The law contempiates that errors may
occur and prescriDes how they may b,
corrected The second error was WheI
: the board of civil authority refused Il
strike his name off the list they shout,
have done so Immediately when satistiel
he had not taken the oath, and there wa
no question upon that point, and SHOULD
have promptly restored his name when b,
70 had taken the oath II before II o'clock
! His name therefore was illegally upon tn,
check list at the Freeman's meeting an,
therefore in the eye of the law, not Their
, at all. Neither could its pos ton uDol
! the check list become legalized by his tax