Morning journal and courier., 1890-11-15
COMMUNICATION.
The Marked Ballots at Bridgeport,
 If There Were Any-And Their Real

The Marked Ballots at Bridgeport,
 If There Were Any-And Their Real
 Significance.
 To the Editor of the JOURNAL AND COURIER:
 It ought to be matter of deep. regret among all classes in our commonwealth that the aggregate of wisdom in our last legislature could not have given the state more sensible and efficient secret ballot law than it did. It is useless here and now to point out its faults of which there are several; and some of its provisions, upon which great stress seems to have been laid by its promoters, can serve no practical good end, and are not of the slightest consequence to anybody.
 For instance, of what possible concern can it be to any candidate of any party, if every ballot, or one ballot in ten bearing his name, is marked in pencil, or in any other way, provided all are printed in the same style, on the same paper, of the same size, and folded precisely alike (as it is alleged they all were), and enclosed in sealed envelope of a required color and sizes 'f;sge
 A voter enters the voting booth and finds there, or carries with him, such a ballot as he wishes to vote, endorsed as Official" and in all respects regular. Whatever private mark he puts upon his ballot, enclosed in sealed envelope pro vided by the state, is a matter of no con- sequence unless it connects him with the ballot personally and gives to some party or person information as to how he had voted, which under the provisions of the law is impossible. Indeed, a recent judicial de- cision in New York holds that voter may legally deposit and have counted written or printed ballots as he pleases; that he may put upon it any mark that he pleases, or his own name, and that is good law, though it may be contrary to some statute. Men find in examining ballots cast in the late election at Bridgeport, a hundred or;two on which it is alleged private marks in pencil are discovered, and they are thrown out. It also appears that they were all cast for Samuel E.. Merwin for governor
 Clearly the presence of these fly srecks or pencil marks conveys no information of political interest. And yet under statutory regulations it may be held, and evidently was 90 held by the board, that the legality of those ballots was thereby destroyed.
 In the New York Sun of to-day (the fifth inst.) appears letter upon this topic by somebody in Hartford who seems void of understanding or perverse, for taking the whole matter to be as he states it any read CT of ordinary intelligence must see at once that the writer of the letter proves himself to be both perverse and foolish to suppose that any of the Suns readers in Connecti- cut, of whatever party, are so stupid as not to see what fool he makes of himself. The only sensible thing he says is when he declares that s'the carelessness with which the new secret ballot law of Connecticut was drawn has led the way to serious com plioations.
 I suppose now that it will be fair question to ask, who if anybody will be benefited if these Bridgeport ballots are thrown out! Evi- dently it will work for Judge Norris ad- vantage in two directions. Not only will the vote for Merwin be diminished, but the chance of the election of Morris by plu. rality be increased. This discovery, if the ballots have been actually marked, throws Q strong light on the dark ways of the
 
 | larly at the capitol, for it cannot be other wise than strongly suspected, if not gen | orally believed, by honest men of botf | parties that some astute politician there, considering our mode of elesting state off | cers by plurality, foresaw how easily the | aggregate vote for the republican candi | dates could be fatally diminished by aI added pencil dot on comparatively a smal I number of Merwin's ballots; and, perhaps it needed only on intimation from some one in authority to have the little tricl nicely done.
 If this supposition be correct we can SC, how very natural it would be for an in | spector sent from the printing office il Hartford to decide that the marks wer made by the rollers in the process of print ing, especially as he had not to decide ol their legality, and might at the same tim
 avert suspicion from his principals
 It may be useful to recall in this con nection how that while the "N. Y. Her ald," the 'sSun" and the "World" dail,
 ragged against the new election law of tn
 State of New York, which is very ik
 ours, the same in principle, and denounced | it in violent terms as certain to cheat ig
 norant men out of their franchise, the tw
 leading democratic papers in this Stat
 have frequently mentioned our law witt
 unexpected favor. There must have beel peculiar reason for this unanimity O
 opinion. Was it because adroit men fore
 saw how easily and proftably they coul,
 thimble-rig the unsuspecting republicans
 have heard related an interesting his
 torical fact which may illustrate the man
 ner ih which the strenuous opposition of
 democratic magnate in Hartford to the SC
 cret ballot law was suddenly changed int
 approval, and simultaneously with thi
 editorial conversion at the Capitol the gun
 of the Register were also silenced. Bu
 this story, with some others equally illus
 trative of good and bad politics, can wait
 As to the prefix ''For," the courts or th
 legislature will settle that, but if it shoul
 be proven that such silly fraud as tn
 marking of ballots in any way has bee
 perpetrated, which as yet do not believe
 the guilt of the act must rest on the mar
 agers of the democratic party, who alon
 could reap any benefit from the crime. COMMON SENSE.