The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1893-08-25
A Queer Case Under the Election Law.

The operation OF the so-called ballot re-
form act in this State continues to present
interesting and important problems for
| solution by the courts. The General Term
Of the Supreme Court In the Fifth Depart
| ment, which comprises the westernmost
part OF the State. has recently been called
upon to determine whether the casting OF
marked ballots at town meeting has the
effect OF rendering the election invalid.
Att town meeting held In Albion. in the
county Of Orleans. JOSHUA BRADSHAW and
CHARLES BIDEnMAN were candidates for
the Office OF Commissioner OF Excise. At
the close OF the poll it was found that 655
ballots had been cast for B1DELMAN and 637
for BRADSHAW. The Board OF Inspectors de-
clared that BIDELMAN. having received the
higher number Of votes. was duly elected.
After BIDE1MAN had qualified and entered
upon the discharge of his duties. BRADSHAW
brought suit against him to have the entire
election declared invalid. He did not
claim that he had received larger number
OF ballots than BIDELMAN. or that there was
anything wrong or illegal about the ballots
cast for BIDELMAN; but he alleged and
proved upon the trial that at least one
hundred OF the ballots cast for him were
not numbered consecutively upon the stubs,
80 as to correspond with the numbers OF the
town tickets and of the tickets voted for
BIDELMAN. but bore much larger numbers.
The Circuit Court in Orleans county held
that the reception Of these ballots operated
to invalidate the election. and. conse-
quently. that B1DELMAN was not duly
elected. The General Term. consisting OF
Judges DWIGHT. LEWIS. MACoMBER. and
HA1GHT. has Just unanimously reversed
this decision.
The opinion Of the General Term Is writ
ten by Mr.. Justice HA1aHT of Buffalo. who
was member OF the Second Division OF the
Court Of Appeals during the entire exist
ence of that tribunal. He distinguishes the
case from that Of the Board Of Canvassers
Of Onondaga county. in which the Court Of
Appeals held that ballots should not be
counted which were endorsed for use in one
election district and were cast in different
district. There the ballots could be distin-
guished from the ballots cast by the voters
OF the other political party. not only before
they were deposited in the ballot box. but
afterward. In this Albion case. however.
the erroneous numbering was upon the
stubs only; and as soon as the stubs were
removed and the ballots were deposited in
the ballot box it became impossible
for any one to identify them. The
Board Of Inspectors acted In good
faith and without fraudulent intent. and
the General Term declares In substance
that there Ia nothing in the ballot reform
act which gives to marked ballots. II they
happen to get into the ballot box. the effect
OF rendering void such ballots as are regu-
lar and comply with the requirements Of
the statute. 1t Is only marked ballot.
voted with the intent that 1t shall afterward
be identified. that is void and Of no effect.
To hold" suys Judge HA1GHT. that the
casting Of such n ballot renders void the
regular ballots and invaidates the election.
would leave 1t within the power Of few
evil-disposed persons to nullify our cleo
tions and deprive our citizens Of their right
Of suffrage. In this case 1t has been found
that one hundred ballots OF the character
described were cast for the relator: but the
principle would have been the same had
there been but five or six. or even less
number. and it would thus be made easy to
nullify any election"
There can be but little doubt that this
view will be sustained by the Court Of APP
peals II the case goes to that tribunal. The
attempt OF minority candidate to avail
himself of invalid votes cast In his own
favor as q means Of ousting his opponent.
who has received q majority Of the votes.
Is not calculated to excite respect.