The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1894-10-16
THE ELECTION CoNsrAsLrs pUry,

In Saturdays Issue The Times call
ed attention to the fact that the Wal
ton-electon law makes an apparent dis
tinction between the duty of the spec al
constable when blind person needs his
assistance. and when one physically or
educationaIy" unable 10 prepare his bal
lot needs it. 1t pointed out that the law
says the constable shall aid the bind
man any may" aid the nliterate one.
but The Times proceeded then to show
that 1T is the settled law OF the land
that where the word may" is used I'm
this connection 1t is to be considered as
"shall," The law is that when the word
''may" is used in statute and the pub
lie has an interest I'm the act TO he
done the word "may" must be considered
10 be shall" The Times, therefore, urged
all special constables to apply to the
Attorney-General for his opinion as to
what their duty in the premises is.
Sundays Dispatch takes the subject up
and quotes the opinion Of the county
judge OF Botetourt county In the recent
buchanan election contest that was de
cided by him. The point in the opinion
IS that if voter is blind or physically
hand the constable must strike out the
names that the voter wishes striker out
But that II he can see and has full use
of his hand. although unable to read. all
the constable can do is to read the bal
lot over to the voter, and point out 10
him which names il is that he-the
Noter-wishes to strike out. The opn-
ion seems to concede that may" is to
be considered shall" but ii makes the
point that while the constable is with
his own hand actually To prepare the
ballot OF the blind or palsied man, ne
IL only to instruct the illterate man in
what he ought to do. This is very
important point indeed. A constable
with an easy conscience might tell an
illiterate man to strike out the wrong
name. when he would not do the act
himself. In the one case he simply con
spires towards committing a crime, but
does not actually commit II, and in the
nature OF things his wrongful act can
never be found out; in the other case
BE must actually commit the crime and
may be found out and convicted.
The distinction, which the judge OF
Botetourt county has drawn Is too fine
spun. What object could the Legisla-
ture possibly have In intending IL? II
Ii blind man or a paisied man is to b.
actually and manually assisted in pIep4r-
ing his ballot, why is not an illiterate
man TO receive the same assistance?
In what respect is one more in
capable OF preparing his ballot than the
other? There could be but one purpose
In making such distinction, and that
would be 10 put il within the power of
dishonest constables TO cheat iliterate
voters without the possibility of detec-
ton. Such a purpose is not to be ascrib-
ed TO such Legislature as Virg MIA had
last winter. We mean the rules Of law
will not allow a court or other Official
TO ascribe such purpose to any Legisla-
lure.
There is nothing in the distinction
which the judge Of Botetourt county has
drawn. The language OF the law is as
follows:
AT the request OF any elector in the
voting booth. who may be physically or
educationaly unable 10 Vote, the said
special constable may render him assist
snce by reading the names and offices
on the ballot. and pointing out to him
the name or namts he may wish no
strike out. or otherwise aid him In pre-
pairing his ballot. In case said ect1r
be blind, said special constable shall pre-
pare said ballot for said Ger in accord
snce with the instructions of said elec.
tor"
Now. why does not the language "or
otherwise aid him in preparing his BAL
lot apply TO ne-''educat.onaly" unable
70 vote as well as TO one 'physicallyp
unable to vote2 OF course Il does: ana
The constable is bound TO actually mark
Out the name that the initerate voter
asks him to mark out.
II is impossible for two journals to be
more diametrically opposed to each other
than The Times and the Dispatch are
spon most public Questions. We mus,