The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1894-03-30
THE VOTERS MARK.
AN INTERPRETATION OF THE ELECTION
LAW OF 1891.

Common Pleas Court, No. 4, handed
down an opinion on Thursday, giving
an important Interpretation of the
Ballot Law of 1901.
The Judge holds that, where the
voter marks individuals, and also
marks the head of group, the mark
ing Of the individual SHALL PRE-.
VAIL, and that the marking of the
groups, so far as the same offices are
concerned, shall be imperative and
void. This ruling is in accord with
the principle that the Act should be
literally construed in aid Of the IN
TENrION of the VOTER. The
Judge also holds that the declaration
of the law, that the mark shall be
placed on the fight side of the name,
is mere direction to the voter to
mark the name and to give uniformity
of marking 70: the convenience Of the
election officers, and that it would be
absurd to hold that mark on the left
side should defeat the intent of the
Act to secure Independent voting.
TEXT OF THE OPINION.
Judge Finletter's opinion is as fol.
lows "Before examining the dispu-
ted ballots we have considered it our
duty to establish the principles upon
which they should be admitted, or re-
jected, for we are not unmindful of
the fact that even the judicial mind
may be influenced by the principles,
opinions, and associations of a life
time. We have concluded that the
intent of the voter, when not in viola
ton of the election law should govern,
if that intent is made apparent by the
ballot itself. The voter manifests his
intention by what he does or omits to
do upon the ballot.
"What he does is evidently a higher
indication of his intention than what
he fails to do. The first shows thought,
purpose, and election. The other
may be the result Of thoughtlessness,
inability to elect, or determination
not TO elect at all. which he desires to
be kept secret. The voter who marks
a single name when he has right to
mark four, and has sixteen to choose
from, emphatically declares that he
prefers that candidate to all others,
and does all he can to elect him, even
at the expense Of his three party as
sociates. The voter who has marked
a group votes simply for his party.
'It has been contended that the
Act of Assembly was imperative, and
that when voter has marked the
head Of a group, and has also marked
individuals III corresponding group,
the voter has voted for more persons
than is allowed by the Act, and there
fore the vote is illegal in this respect.
"There can be no doubt that vote
for two many persons is illegal. 1t is
equally clear that the Act declares
that mark at the head of a group
embraces the whole group and that
1t shall be SO counted. We must
therefore reconcile the language of
the Act with the principle that the
INTENT Of the voter SHOULD
PREVAIL.
at is manifest that there can be no
virtue in Republican Institutions if the
franchise of voting is not freed from
all improper influences. A controlled
vote is the act of slave and not the
act of freeman. Even in the early
days of the Republic, when all politi
Cal virtues are supposed to have
guarded the public veal, 1t was found
that voters were governed by question
able influences. Franklin complained
that 4 certain class too prominently
controlled public affairs, and Burr or
ganized the evil elements of New
York City, and by them ruled the
State, and had controlling influence
in national affairs. The complaint
has been continuous since that politi
cal, social, business, and religious in
fuences have controlled the free exer-
else of the elective franchise.
ut was supposed that the secret
ballot, as it heretofore existed, would
prevent this evil, but that has been a
delusion. Before the Act of 1891 no
vote could be kept secret and abstain
ing from voting was regarded as an
objectionable offense by those who
thought they had right to have the
vote.
"This great and growing evil
thoughtful men regarded as the great
est menace to free institutions and
the Act of 1891 was intended to ar
rest the evil, by securing to the voter
the right of selections, free from any
influence. This is its paramount pur-
pose and intention. 1t secures to the
voter a ticket in which all the candi-
dates are placed in proper groups. 1t
gives him privacy in which he may
make his selections, and makes it i'm,
possible for anyone to know how he
voted. AT the same time it gives him
means to identify his ballot.