Pawtucket tribune. (Pawtucket, R.I.) 1890-189?, 1892-09-28
THE SECRET BALLOT.
Rulings by Connecticut
Supreme Court.
QUO WARRANT0 CASES..
Finally Decided in a Manner Salts
factory to Republicans.

NEW HAVEN. Sent 2s-The supreme
court Of the state filed its decision in the
quD warranto cases Of Phelan VI. Walsh
and sanger vs.. Henry with the clerk of
the superior court In this city. Both cases
are ,u 'idered together. The opinion Of
the court is written by Judge Carpenter,
with a dissenting opinion 10y Judges Sey-
mour aud Fem. The opinions are very
vo.uminous, making in all about 10000
words Judge Carpenter, at the outset,
considers the questions which involve the
construction Of the secret ballot act passed
by the general assembly In 1889. Two con-
siderit,ons had weight with the court in
adopting this course.
First, the construction of that act Il OF
immediate practical importance in view of
the approaching elections, and there is
general desire that those questions should
Dc eauthoritatively determined at an early
date, and IL the court should hold that IL
has no jurisdiction of these cases, there
might be some impropriety In proceed
ing TO discuss and determine minor ques-
tons involved; second, If the views taken
OF these questions shall lead to the con
clusion that Il is not shown that any one
has majority of all the votes legally
cast at the election Of 1890, both cases will
be practically disposed of by the facts
and
Must Necessarily he ID ismissed.
The court assumes that IL has jurisdc-
ton, at least for the purposes OF inquiring
into and determining the facts of the
cases, and in the present state of things To
apply remedy. The question whether or
not the general assembly has lost its
power to declare an election is passed by
without discussion The court says on this
point: We purposely refrain from eX-
pressing any opinion upon any of these
points, and wish to have it distinctly un-
derstood that they remain open ques-
tons."
The court then takes up the finding Of
facts in each case aud considers them
minutelv and at great length. The differ
ent classes OF ballots In dispute are dis
cussed and the laws bearing upon each
class is clearly set forth. The
Opinion Of the Majority
Of the court summarized is rs follows:
The superior court Is advised that the ballots
rejected by the moderators, giving no reason
therefor, and those rejected for beir double
should he counted in estimating the whole
humber of votes cast; that the errors in the
count should be corrected, that the "for'
ballots so-called, should be counted; that the
folded or creased ballots in East Lyme and
Sharon should be rejected; that all the ballots
rejected because of erations i'm respect TO
the Office Of probate Judge, some OF which
were designated for one district and sent to
another, aud ballots with blank after the
office of Judge OF probate should be counted,
except IA ballot of this class In the town of
Sterling, which latter ballot should be reject
ed; that the 287 ballots In the town of Litch-
field, upon which there was some controversy
because of Irregularities in the spelling of a
name, are legal ballots and should be cOunted
that the ballots in the town OF Lyme, in
which the letter n" In the last
name of the candidate for Judge of probate
was erased, are legal and should be counted;
that the four ballots cast in the town of Hart
land for Judge Of probate, and which carried
pastors placed In rather unusual manner,
th )uld be rejected; that l2i Of the l26 ballots
rejected in the town of Bridgeport should be
counted, and that the fourteen ballots In the
town of Winchester, rejected 10y the modera-
tor because they had pastors written in ink,
were properly rejected.
Dissenting Opinions.
Judges Seymour and Fem declare that
they cannot concur In that portion Of the
opinion of the majority Of the court
which holds that the superior court should
have counted the 800 ballots which the evil
dence of the counters returns and mOder-
ators' certificates were rejected and eX-
cluded from the count for being double
The dissenting judges say that to hold
that the moderators should do other than
follow the plain instructions of the law
would do violence TO the ordinary rules of
statutory construction, and makes the law
a snare TO catch mediators-the statue in
structing them, In explicit terms, 10 do
one thing, and the courts, by n construc-
tion of those unambiguous directions, re-
guiring them to do other things in addi
tion,up penalty of otherwise defeating
the election.
They therefore hold that the action of
the superior court in both cases, which
have been considered as one, in decining
to count the ballots rejected by the modur
Rtors as double, except the ballot I'm the
town of Enfield, was correct ana should be
sustained.
Scare IL About Over.