The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1896-12-12


ness and no provision was made fol
authenticating them, while the enrolled
bill, bearing the signatures of tho
presiding officers of both houses. wa:
the best evidence that the act was
properly approved by the Legislature
Mr.. Dickson argued that the consti-
tuition of the state of Utah provided
that every citizen over the age OF 2
years had the right to cast his vote
was clothed with the franchise ano
then the constitution further provides
that the ballot shall be secret, which
leaves the legislature power 10 pre-
scribe methods TO ensure fair cleo
ton and to prevent frauds and for this
purpose and for successfully tracing
fraudulent votes, if such were cast, il
was provided that numbers be placed
on the corners OF the ballots, that the
number be covered over and sealed
which was a secret ballot and no one
could discover how any man cast his
vote without making himself crimi-
nal. except in the case of a contested
election, when it became proper for the
purpose of tracing fraudulent votes to
break the seals and discover how that
illegal vote had been cast.
WOULD BE INTOLERABLE.
1t would be intolerable that a whole
election should be set aside because of
the misconduct or inadvertence OF a
judge of election who may have failed
TO fold the corner OF the ballot, Suf-
ficient number being read if the ballot
is held up to the light. If that theory,
as urged by the petitioners, prevailed,
then it would be in the power of every
judge OF election TO disfranchise any
and al voters that he pleased All the
judge would have to do would be 10
fold the ballots Of his friends a SUI
hcient number of times to prevent the
mum bers being read when held I'D to
the light, and fold the ballots OF those
he wished TO disfranchise only once.
Such i theory is absurd. 4 voter
could not be disfranchised because of
the carelessness or criminality of an
election judge, neither could the whole
people OF the state be deprived OF tn
right OF franchise, conferred on them
by the constitution, upon any such pre-
text or upon any preteXt whatever
when the voters were not TO blame.
Mr.. Dickson urged upon the court
the dire consequences which would fol-
low if the election were declared void.
Such a ruling would be revolutionary
in character, and it was more than
doubtful, if the court so ruled. If an
other election could be held in this
state. The people should not he de-
prived of their votes, even if election
officials had miscOnducted themselves
or made honest mistakes. The viii
of the people had been SO clearly and
Enthusiastically expressed that none
could doubt it. and it would be moth
ing short Of revolutionary TO disfran-
chise the great body of the people and
take the power of government out of
their hands when neither the people
nor any individual had been guilty of
any wrong doing.
Mr. Dickson mentioned briefly the
objections that the title of the act OF
the legislature was unconstitutional
because ii contained more than one
subject, holding that the title con-
formed to the requirements of the con-
stitution-
With reference TO the date on which
the term of the petitioner as judge
son read the section of the consutp-
ton in which it is provided that in
case OF a vacancy in the judiciary the
governor snail fill the vacancy by an
and the appointee VIII
huld office only until the next general
election.
AS 70 the further objection that there
was an emblem upon the ballot by
which the voter could make q cross
that was not his choice because there
was no other system by which he
could cast his vote, Mr.. Dickson re-
ferred to the terms of the act which
provided that every political party
which had at the previous election
pOlled s per cent of the vote was en-
titled to make nominations and have
the names OF their candidates placed on
the ballot, besides which any individual
voter could write the name Of any per
son he wished on the ballot and vote
for that person for any Office he chose.
Mr.. Dickson concluded by saying
that the petition was so devoid Of
merit that there ought not to be much
reason to fear that the petitioner Will
in overthrowing the viii of the
people. The supreme court is the place
of refuge for the people and we have
no reason to fear its power viii ever
be used to counteract the will Of the
people fully expressed.
JUDGE JUDD.
Judge Judd followed 1Ir. Dickson.
and in substance said:
The contention of the petitioner in this
case attacks the validity Of two acts of
the legislature of the state, passed a the
session which convened in January OF the
present year.
i ne frSt IS known bN the ute as An
Act relating &c and making sCnd-y pro
visions concerning elections 1t is also
designated aS Chapter 125 Of the laws
of 1896 and found at page 500 of the print
ed acts
The provision of this act constituting
the defendants q canvassing board to
canvass and certify to returns IN certain
elections IS found at section q of said
act. page go. laws Of 1895.
The objection which is urged 10 the
validity of this law is best stated in the
language OF the petition itself, and is as
follows:
.'Your petitioner. however. alleges with
regard to the said act that the same IS
illeeal and never became an act OF the
or the law CT the state of
Utah for the following reasons, to-wit:
THAT by the constitution OF the state
Of Utah. the vote upon the final passage
OF all bills shall he by yea and nay vote
That the said pretended act as found
printed in the session laws of the leglSla-
ture Of Utah of 1895, was not passed by a
yea and nay vote; but on the contrary
thereof. there was a disagreement be-
tween the two houses. to-wit: The house
OF representatives and the senate of the
state Of Utah. as to the terms Of said pre-
tended act or bill. and the same was re-
ferred 10 a conference committee; that
when the said conference committee re-
ported to the house of representa- ives
they reported certain amendments created
and agreed to by said conference COM
mittee instead of passing said bill after
such amendments We're added. said house
Of representatives on a viva voce motion
in the conference committees
all of which Is found on the
house Journal OF 1896 a. page 72S in the
following language: on motion of the
house concurred in conference comm-tte
TO senate bill lo2 The sad
bill now appearing as an enactment, in
The laws OF 1895 under the title aforesaid
being known and having been originally
senate bill 1922
1t viii be observed that IN THIS objection
the premise IS stated as follows: That
...,,- =. i--l..nr Of the sLaIa of I-tah