Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1897-05-29

| 0""'0lS uuuer the cross printe
thereon; also another cross with lead nen
| Gil In the blank space beneath the name n
ii. ). Starrett, a candidate for short tern
regent; also another cross with lead pen
Gil near the middle of said ticket and i'm
medIately following the wcrls "Fo
Members of Assembly," The b4llo
marked Exhibit No. II was also reiecta,
~ me lower court. This also was correct
| aS the elector voting said ballot had at
tempted 10 vote for the township officer,
OF Eureka and PaliSade townships n,
making the proper crosses after the name,
OF the candidates for whom he desjred +,
vote. Under the rulings herein this hal
| lot is also void
There was also east at said last na,od
precinct ballot for the resnonda,,
marked Exhibit No. 43, which was
counted foi the said respondent over the
onJectr"n OF the appellant. The cuur. did
not err III so counting this ballot. I,c
"a ipsSeS thereon are not perfect but they
are sufficient and the ballot is valid Bal
lot marked Exhibit GG, and cast at said
precinct for the appellant HiuI. and
counted by the court for the anna1snt
over the objection of the respondent is
Nolu ior the reason that the person voting
tiie same attempted to vote for the town.
snip officers of Eureka and Palisado
townships by placing cross after the
''iiles OF the township Officers for whom
ne "eslred to vote. This ballot should
nave been rejected by the court. Ballot
F Y
peilaiI at SAID precinct and not counted
oy the court, over the objection of the an
peiIait, was properly rejected for the rea
son mat the same was disfigured by uar-
tiaIiy erased cross after the name Of 4. p.
Anderson, candidate for long term
I oHniy Co oumissioner.
h4iI"t marked Exhibit TT cast for tha
i'ppeil"ut at said precinct was not countad
"Y lhA lower cOUrt over the objection of
lhr appellant. There is no apparent rna-
son Tor ihs refusal on the part of the
court from an inspection of this ballot
and 1t should have been counted for tho
'pIeIl"ht' IL Is clean and the crosses |
'neIeoii are above the "erage The same |
may DE sad of ballot marked Exhibit |
<-H cast at said precinct for the appellant
which the court refused to c0unt r,,Io+, |
marked Exhibits WV. RR, %. FP. " !
M, y and \ A css at said ,,racin,. |
Tor the appellant. HUI. and counted f,r
'iH' py lhe court over the objection ofthe
respondent are clean ballots and were so |
property counted. Ballots marked Ev-
lloltS y and IL cast at said election pre-
'''NU h'l the respondent, Sweeney, and |
1'"'''e'' lor MN by the court over the OBJ
ettioh OI the appellant. are clean ballots
ihd We're so properly counted
IN beoWaWe precinct No. ), ballots
MARKED tNhIblts ~, 30, 81, 81, -, 81, 81. IS,
w. ol ana o2 were voted for the respon-
ten, Sweeney, and 50 counted bv rl,o
''r' over the objection of the an7,nIla,,+
\" 'N''iiiilajlon of these ballots fails tn
'iN'H"|" .":Y marks thereon that wnuld
FHrf .leln Illegal or void. thrrrf,ro
D r. N,'o no error in counting the same
= me sam" precinct ballots marked En-
IlbltS 'p| and 80 We're cast for the raSn,,d-
Mt and counted for him over lha ol,;oo
ION of The appellant. This wa. or,.,,.
he electors who vuteI these ballot. ,t- ?
7hlpted To vote for the township nfr;nars
the townships of Eureka and Palis.,do
V placing the cross opposite the rano,otj
le candidates for the respective TOWNSHIP, {
fficeS for whom they desired to vote In 4
he same precinct ballot marked Exhibit !
was voted for said respondent and re- ,
cted by the court in the count over tho )
pJertlon of the respondent. This ballot :
marked with cross opposite the name 7
{. l.. Broy, candidate for long term c
'"hlN Commissioner, which t|.n voter -
l. deliberately and intentionally IT.
lhpt"d I" scratch oct ami o}litcra.r ,yith ''
pencil, thereby distiguring tin. ballot 10 )
extent that justified tn" cour, in rafns t
z to count the same. ,
we now come to the consideration of
= three ballots cast at said Beowawe y
Al "A cd 70 h..x-