Evening journal., 1891-06-04
FOR" BALLOTS ILLEGAL
An Important Decision in the
Connecticut Muddle.
THE COURT STATES ITS OPINION


Laws of the Nutmeg state which wer~
Framed to Secure Pure EIeeti@ns.
NRw HAVEN, June 4.--The decision of
che supreme court in the suit Of c. Wilbur
Fields VS.. Sidney J. Osborne ct al, better
known as the contested Branford election
case, has been announced, and with the
announcement was filed the written opin-
ION Of the court. The opinion was written
by Judge Seymour tDemocra0 and con-
CURED throughout by Judges Carpenter
and L.oomis Chief Justice Andrews and
Judge Torrance concur in the judgmeas
which advises that the plaintiff was not
elected selectman Of Branford and dis
misses his petition which prayed that lts
be declared elected. but on the other parts
Of the opinion they non-concurred. Thisde-
cision Is Of the greatest Importance and
has been awaited with anxiety
The Legal status OF the for Baiiots.
II involved the opinion OF the court on
the question OF the legality Of 70 called
"forn ballots which question is first and
foremost In the gubernatorial controversy,
and a judicial opinion Of which practically
decided the governorship. The decision
called Tor a construction of those pro
visions OF the secret ballot act which pre-
seribed that the ballots shall contain
nothing on them but the names OF the
candidates for Office and the Office yoied
for and the name OF the party issuing IL.
The court decided that the ballots were
not void for the reason that the word
for was used, but because their general
form was In direct violation of the law
governing the style OF a legal ballot
A. A., fba raaesnn fnr GRANTING the pQff-
tion shat a hundred citizen ballots con
| tanned the illegal words for judge of
probate, Henry n. Steadman, " the opinion
says: Now there can be no question bat
/ that the Legislature intended TO say that
| ballot which failed TO accord with certain
| specifically ennmerated requirements
should be void, irrespective OF all con-
/ siderations as TO the intent or effect ef
such failure
1T considered uniformity an important
means of preventing fraud, and there We're
certain matters in which uniformity could
be expressly provided for. But balluIs
| which satisfied the expressed standard Of
| uniformity yet might be made 20 lack en-.
tire uniformity, and SO be identified hy
various devices which the legislature could
neither provide against nor force. At tne
same time the ballots were issued and cast
there WAS no election for Judge Of probate.
The Office could not be filled at town
election The title Of the Office and lAe
name OF the candidate were foreign to The
ballot, and were inserted in violation of
the express and unamblguous terms 20
the act So too, were the words and cx-
ofiicio registrar Of births deaths and mar
riages They we're inserted in violation
Of the act.
Not Too Great Price 60 Pay.
"It being clear that both come within
che express prohibition Of the law, what -
our dntyf A plain provision Of the law il
violated In point concerning which the
act does not authorize US TO inquire into
the intent on. the consequences Of the yio-
lation.
B I'm short, the legislature has seen fit to
say that II ballot contains the addition
: to its specified contents, which these w y
4 shall be void. Cniess we a.s prepare 10
holu tine ,s,4 unconstitutional we cannot
D disregard its requirements II 10 Is harsh
q and unreasonable the renedy is with ths
< | Legislature that enacted it, and not with
. the courts, which are bound to respect it,
4 The legislature has spoken and obetllence
j Is our first and only duty. IL Is at liberty
!, To throw around the ballot box such safe
= guards and regulations AS it may deem
1. | proper, and il Il the duty of the citizcns. to
d conform thereto Such Inconvenience Is
: not too great price to pay for an honest,
Y pure ballot
y The Ballots Declared Illegal.
ut Is a matter OF public notorieuy that
? ballots prepared by different persons
: equally determined TO observe the require
= ments OF the law have in some cases con
: tained the word for ia just position
G with the officers voted for and sometimes
omitted il. We refer 70 these instances ia
4 conformation OF our position that the lam
guage under consideration is in fact am
biguons. If ambiguous It is the proper
= subject OF construction.
I'm discharging the duty OF constituting
e it 10 that the voter shall not be deprived
j OF his vote except upon a plain provision
, Of the law we feel bound TO hold that the
p act does not in terms expressly nor by nee
, essary construction prohibit the use OF the
y word for before the title Of the Office Ic
y follows, therefore, that neither It's use nor
= the failure to use it necessarily and Ot ~
I. self invalidates the ballots II the regular
4 ballots issued by political party CONTAIN
y the word for before the title Of the ON ccrs
thereon named, then it cannot be held to
q be a mark or device 80 that the same may
u be identified in such manner AS to Indicate
s who might have cast them, and, therefore,
regular ballots OF political party omit
the word tor In the connection stated
then the use Of the word IN some Of the
ballots cast, inasmuch as IL would be q
mark or device by which the same might
I be identined, would be Illegal. Each casa
= must be governed by It's own circum-
stances and be decided question OF
y fact under the principles herein stated.
upon the facts in the case we hold that
= the ballots in question were not illegal
: and void because Of the use of the word
for They were illegal, however, as wa
= have already stated, for another reason
Being illegal, there is no foundation for
the petitioners claims that he was elected
selectman, aud his petition, which was
n based upon that claim, must be dismissed ~
). The Citlxsns' Party's Existence.
4 The legal existence Of Citizens party Ia
$ defined By the court as follows: The eles
y ment " time is not essential to the formAr
'e tion OF legal party. IL may spring int@
= existence from the exigencies OF particu-
= lar election, aud with no intention of con~
Y tinuing after the exigency has passed T@
u hold the contrary would be to strike q
blow al that independence in political ao-
tion upon which the good government OF
a locality may depend. Nor can the NUM-
II form a legal party be prescribed by Laws
q without violating one of the fundamental
r theories of popular government.
l. "If it is shown, As il IS in this @e. thaA
! an independent political party was formed
. thai il assumed a distinctive name and