The Somerset herald. [volume] (Somerset, Pa.) 1870-1936, 1892-08-31
MeyersdaIe School Board Contest.

trict has beel defeated by legal technicali-
ty and - consequence a Democrats board
Of direelo-s. whom the voters clearly decided
by their ballots they 6s.I nos n ant, have been
declared dulY elected By TIE court. 1t is
unfortunate IN Eases such as tbs that the
court has no Discretionary power, but such
I i The lsx and our Republican friends in
MeyeTsdaie must abide by il
Following is the opinion and decree Of the
court
L4ve contested election for Schoo, Direct
ors in the Borough Of Asyersdale
1 In 1891, the Court, upon the petition Of
citizens OF said borough removed the mem
bers Of the school board and appointed fun
board to succeed them until their Successes
to be chosen should be duly qualified. On
the 10Th Of Feb ruary, 1892, therefore, six di-
rsctors were 70 be elected to I'll the regular
| term and vacancies so occAsioned, viz: two
for the term OF three yelS, two for two
years and TAO for one year
Many Of the voters failed 70 designate up
on their ballots the ierps which they desired
the candidates oftheir choice should respect
lively I'LL whilst Others named the term as
well as the candidate.
The election certificate, or return, shows
that 5. C. Hartiy bad Is3 votes, Wm- Appel
had 2S5 votes, Geo. W. Collins had 10 votes,
8 S. Good had Is0 votes. ". r. Habel had
III votes, B. d. Morgan had 30 votes. Ken
nedy Price and Wm. Rupp for 3 years term
had Iii and II9 votes respectively, A. T.
John and }. W. Young for , years term had
I53 and 10 votes respectively. J. F. Antho-
{ ny and II J. E5becka for one years term
lad I45 and I33 votes respectively. OF the
ballots cast for Harley I65 Of those for Ap-
/ pei rs. Of those for Collins Ig3. Of those for
Good I55, Of those for Habel l7o and Of
those for Morgan is9 had no designation Of
/ tn term upon them or anything from
which il could be inferred how long the yo-
Z tsrs intended they shoGid serve
4 majority Of the election officers did rot
undertake to pass upon tie question raised
/ by this failure 10 designate the term, bur, az
/ ter computing the vote returned those reoeiY-
I ing the highest number Of votes. VIZ; Hart
/ ley, Appel. Collins, Good, Habel and Nor
+ gan. as hayiug been elected. One Of the in
! sPectors did not sign the certificate
Ia due time a petition Of the required
number Of qualified electors Of the school
/ district was presented 10 the Court, contest
/ ing the election on the ground that the oer-
] uhoate, or return, was undue, Illegal and
/ incorrect, because the votes cast for Hart
( ley, Appel Collins, Good, Habel and Nor
! gan were illegally cast and should not have
been counfet aud that the election officers
should have declared kennedy Price and
Wm. Rupp elected school directors for 5
years, A John and J. W. Young tor two
years and J. f. Anthony and Il J. Ebbecka
for one year.
The ground mainly relied upon by the
Contestants Vas the failure Of nearly all Of
the supporters OF the contestess 10 indicate
upon their ballots the term Of office; but il
+ vas also alleged that few persons ShO vot-
ed for them were not properly qualified
electors. As We regard the case upon the
election return and the evidence taken by
the commissioner il j. not Necessary 10 con-
81 Ter the alleged Illegal votes. Whether the
ballots which had nothing upon them to
I indicate the length Of term should have been
+. counted lor the coutestees IS the controlling
I question IN the case
Judge Cooley il his Principles Of Consti-
tional laE, page -. says. In elections
/ by ballot the voter must take cIre that his
ballot shall be complete IN itself, 50 that il
shall express his intention without resort to
] extraneous evidence for explanation of APP
parent antiquities. The general rules Of
Law do not permit written instrument to
be varied or added 10 By parol and in case
+. Of ballots, the pa7oI evidence would be sPe-
cially Objectionable and dangerous, since
public interest Of the highes; importance de-
pend upon the elections, and the induce
ment 10 corruption and perjury would
sometimes be enormous.
The same author in bis work on COnstitu-
tiCnaI Limitations. page Gil. says, We
think evidence Of such facts as may be call
ed the circumstances surrounding the cleo
ton, such IS who were the candidates
brought forward BY the nominating eonyen-
tions whether other persons Of the same
name resided IN the district q and If
whethtr they were eligible or had been
named for The oifoe II the ballot Was print
Cd imperfectIy, how Il came to be 50 print
ed. and the Ike, Is admissible for the pur-
pose Of showing that the imperfect ballot
was meant for = particular candidate, unless
the name Is 50 different that 10 thus apply
il would be 70 contradict the ballot itself 5
or ,a,lss re ballot s 50 defc5'iss alt L fIls 20
sl.o,r aag iafsafan riafersr, u iriica clse 4 T.
a8t a3.sisg-bie7 These extracts sum up the
rliiugs OF numerous courts N Penn. and
elsewhere It must be observed, however,
that the extransous evidence which may De
resorted to must relate to what appears up
on the ballot for the purpose Of arriving at
the intention Of the voter al tie time Of de-
posting Il.
In Tie case 81 bar It is not pretended tha.
tie voters Who neglected 70 specify upon
their ballots the several terGls o. the candi-
dates Of their choice desired 10 DO 50.
/ On the contrary the proof before theoom-
missioner isto tie effect that on the evening
preceding the election, At the meeting which
placed the conies.eas in nomination, It vas
determined that the voters should express
no preference upon that subject, bat tia.
the Two who might receive the highest vote
should serve for three years. tie two next
for two years and the two lowest ior one
year, in case they were elected So the
question was held in abeyanos, to Be deter
mined By the result Of the election
wm h Allen, who presided over that
meeting, Vas ralied as q witness and testi-
fed ss folioWs About 10 70 80 voters
we're present When we came to the
nomination Of school directors said, the 7e
are two 70 be elected for three years, two for
two years and tNo for one year We had
[ then considerable diseussion, Or debate, as 10
how we shoald tx this thing. One OF two
members produced tbe school laEs, and IL
vas discussed for number Of minutes, and
IL was sg-eed that the tTo receiving the
highest votes should be electe! for th e three
years tenn, and the next two receiving the
next highest number Of votes should be the
tive year term men. and tie txo receiving
I the least number OF votes should be the one
year term men es I don't think that there
was q single man who voted that ticke; that
did not understand what the caucus agreed
to- It Vas rot, therefore, an accidental
omission in preparing the tickets, but they