St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-01-30
HARE IS ALDERMAN.
The Supreme Court at Last
Declares Him Elected Over
Pennington
BY ONE LONELY VOTE.
If There Ever Was Any Actual
Doubt as to Hare'S
Election
IT IS NOW FAST ASLEEP.
Judge Willis Has Reason to
Feel Proud Over the
Result.
IT IS NOW FAST ASLEEP.

If there ever was any real doubt as to
the election of popular bob" Hare as
alderman for the Sixth it was put TO
sleep yesterday by decision OF the su-
preme court which affirms the ruling OF
Judge Willis, as well as the returns of
the canvassing board. The decision
was handed down by Chief Justice
Start. and it involves various features
of much interest and Importance, as in
terpreting the present election.
In the Eighth precinct OF the ward 80
votes were cast for Pennington and AZ
for Hare, all of which had been num-
bered by the judges without the knowl-
edge OF the electors. The action of the
judges was due TO a miSinterprelatlon
of the law. These votes. says the SUI
preme couIt. were very properly counted
as cast; otherwise it might be possible
for the judges of election to disfran-
chise electors at will.
LII addition, the district court counted
twelve votes for Hare, which that num-
Der of electors who were prevented
from voting at the election, by an
erroneous ruling of the judge, said they
had intended to cast for him. On this
point the decision Of Judge Willis is re-
versed. The supreme court holds that
it is impossible 10 count votes according
to the way people maintain they would
have voted, chiefly because 1t is i'm
practicable
TO Prove the Truth
of their assertions. while the admission
OF such votes would throw the door open
to fraudulent claims by qualified electors
after the announcement of the result OF
every close election.
Two ballots were entirely rejected by
the lower court because they did not
bear regular cross mark opposite the
name of Pennington. 1t is clear, how
ever, that the mark made was intended
for a cross, and not for the purpose of
fraudulently identifying the ticket.
The ballots are therefore counted for
the appellant.
Three ballots for Pennington and one
for Hare were marked with the sig
natures of voters. The action OF
Judge Willis in counting these votes
for neither candidate is approved. 1t
seems evident to the higher court that
these signatures could have been writ
ten for no other purpose than to ident-
ify the ballots, and thas remove the
characteristic secrecy which the legis-
Iature, by adopting the present Aus
tralian ballot law, clearly Intended to
throw about the choice Of voters. The
fact that iliterate voters do not MAIN
tain this secrecy, and that it is possible
to identify ones choice i'll other ways,
scarcely in violation of the law, is held
to be no reason why the secret ballot
proposed by our lawmakers should not
be guarded as much as possible. Nor
is the secrecy a matter Of personal
right, which the elector can waive if he
sees fit. On the contrary, it was a
feature adopted mainly through con-
siderationS
OF Public Policy.
The court, therefore, decides that
Pennington received LOIS votes and
Hare 1,Ol9 votes, and the latter was
lawfully elected.
The only point from which Justice Col
Inns dissented was the rejection of the
four ballots marked with the signatures
of electors. He says that it had not
been proven that these names were the
actual signatures Of the persons who
cast the ballots, Dor had it been shown
that the names Oh the ballots had been
Inv
around the voting booth, or even by the
canvassing board. Not until the ballots
came into the possession of the district
court were the written names dis
covered-three months after the cleo
ton
The law prohibits the voter from
showing" his ballot or ''diyulging"
how he voted Yet there was surely no
evidence that any one had observed the
ballots, or had received any information
as to the choice of the four electors.
Consequently Hore should receive one
more vote and Pennington three more
which would elect the latter. The
syllabus follows:
Here Is the Syllabus.
In re contest and appeal of Yelling
ton Pennington. etc., VS.. Robert n.
Hare. Syllabus-1. Where qualified
electors offered to vote. but were pre-.
vented from actually casting their bal
lots by an erroneous decision of the
election judges: Held that such ballot
cannot be counted for the candidate
the electors subsequently declared they
intended to have voted for, if they had
voted.
2. Section SO, chapter 105, and subs
section of section 1876, chapters, Laws
1898, construed.
Held that where the judges of cleo
ton, by reason of mistake as TO the
law, numbered the ballots of electors
without their knowledge, the ballots so
numbered are legal and must be counted
as cast.
Held that where electors Intention
ally write their names upon their bal
OTIS for Identification and so cast them,
such ballots cannot be counted for
either party.
Held that the proviso of subsection
is mandatory. but that any mark which
it is apparent was honestly intended
for a cross mark and for nothing else,
must be given effect as such, no matter
how crude in form it may be. Judg-
ment Affirmed. START, Z. j.
Roberson's Lectures.
By aid OF new mechanical views of
moving waters, tossing ships, fallin
snow. revolving planets. all of which