The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1897-12-03


| the legislature has no power TO require
| any other or different qualifications from ron
| those embodied In the Constitution Ihe
| general rule is that where the 5aw pro, th
| yides only reasonable safeguard for the
1 purity of the election 1t is not an addl-
| tional qualification and Is constitutional.
| The result In the present case as re-
| turned shows:-
| One half is....... ..........-.........-.. ooo4
| Add one...... ........ ................'
Voting in favor only.................. 7o44s
WANTING ss4
| amendment shall from the time of filing
| said certificate be and become an amend.
ment to and part OF the ConstltuIloon lo Oh
The Governor shall summon the Board
| on 10 October four or more members OF
| this Senate and they shall determine the
act to regulate elections. 1876 so far as
applicable. They shall declare which OF
said proposed amendments have been
adopted; and any proposed amendment
which by said certificate and the determi-
nation of the Board of State Canvassers
shall appear to- have received in It's taVor
majority of all the votes cast in the
State for orlagainst said proposed amend-
ment shall from the filing of said certln-
cate be and become an amendment.
The Constitution says
IL the people at d Specldl 6leCllOh ~ "
held for that purpose only shall approve
and ratify by majority of the electors
qualified to vote for the members OF the
Legislature voting thereon, such lam amend lld
ment so approved and ratified shall be-
come, ETC., etc.
The suffrage clause of the Constitution.
Article H. provides that every male
citizen of the United States Of the age
been resident of the State one year and
| of the county In which he claims his vote
| five months next before the election shail
be entitled to vote, ETC., etc.
The people must approve by an amrma-
tive vote. The approval required is an
affirmative, positive act. BY similar words
unless majority vote for it. No law
can be passed unless a majority of the
members elected vote for it.
The natural law might be a majority
of the votes cast as said in the act But
If this be the meaning of the Constitu-
tional requirement, then, the words by a
majority of the electors qualified voting
thereon, means that no result can be OBJ
tained without majority of all electors
qualified under the Constitution voting.
If majority of the vote cast and counted
be enough. then there must be a poll list
of a majority of all the qualified electors
in the State, because, the words Ma
jority voting, must be given a meaning
They either require that a majority of all
must vote, or that majority OF all
voters participating must be obtained
In one view the sentence means.
"A majority of the qualified electors
having voted thereon
If however. this construction be re-
jected then the clause must read:
"A majority Of the qualified electors who
did vote thereon"
If this be the meaning then the only
question is whether the names on the poll
list indicated qualified voters.
The presumption is in it's favor.
No one has disputed it.
The fact that some ballots have been re-
jected could not alter the fact that the
voters were qualified electors and voted
If the registry law or the rules of the
election act guided the judges, and they
threw out ballots from the numbering,
tutional, if the ballots We're intelligible.
Z Such action prevented the people from
being heard by the qualified electors. They
result you disfranchise them.
If a manner was adopted which misled
the elector in framing his ballot this was
of the judges be carried SO far as to de-
prive an elector of the benefit of his vote
by rejecting it; still it cannot keep him
from being a qualified elector voting, and
a majority of the poll list including his
vote would be necessary to adopt the
amendment.
the election, as qualified electors, with the
consent and by the judgment of all,
registers, judges and canvassers. The re-
turns report the names on the poll list,
still.
If under general election law of the
State the judges rejected ballot because
the paper was transparent, would that
deprive qualified elector whose vote
was deposited in favor of the amendment
from still being qualified elector. voting.
participating in the election He is one
of the people to whom the question had
to be submitted. He is one of the qualified
electors voting, and the Constitution re-
quires a majority of them.
The end does not justify the means III
constitutional construction.
In Indiana an amendment to the State
Constitution was submitted to the people
in accordance with the constitutional pro-
visions declaring that any proposed
amendment shall be adopted IF ma
same" The Court held in this case that
an amendment which received the votes of
less than a majority Of all the electors
who voted at an election. though re-
ceiving a majority of the votes cast for
and against itself, was not ratified that
the amendment to become a part of the
Constitution. must be ratified by the votes
of majority of the electors of the State.
Where $1,000 participated in the election:
5os5 in favor, 1000 against, held that 5000
was not the vote of the majority.
There are large number of cases which
hold that "a majority of qualified voters"
means a majority of all qualified, whether
they did or did not vote.
In Smith v. Board of Comrs., of Rem
vile county Mimi. 1885, 65 N. W. Rep.
1885, it was held that for the purpose of
at an election held under the county seat
removal act, all of the ballots cast unin
telligible as well as intelligible must be
considered.
If this be the law the amendment could
not be declared adopted by the Board even
under the rule laid down in the act of
1897.
The amendment did not have in its
favor majority of the votes cast at
the election, or a majority of the "quali-
fed electors who voted thereon
In the case of the People VS.. Winant 46
Illinois 2e3 an election was held on the
at the same time as an election for a
Circuit Judge; it was held that the vote
cast on the single question of removal
would not govern as to whether a ma
jority of all the legal votes was given in
favor of removal, but it must appear that
majority of all the votes cast at that
election were SO given.
After citing a number of authorities at
great length, Mr.. Stockton concludes as
followS:-
The result of this examination makes it
necessary for the Court to decide the fol-
lowing points,
First. Whether g majority of the votes
returned as cast for and against the
amendment which excludes 961 ballots as
rejected ballots is majority of the
qualified electors voting. to wit, al 672 as
shown by the return.
properly rejected for or against the
amendment it could effect the question of
the number of qualified electors that
voted on the amendment or relative
Third. whether every ballot cast was
not necessarily a vote Of a qualified cleo
tor on the question submitted from the
- -, n,7ar.1 5iraotad II, tJ,a ~ ,f