The Honolulu republican. [volume] (Honolulu, T.H.) 1900-1902, 1900-11-02

purpose aud shall then and therein mark
his bslIot in the manner herein pre-
srribed.''
The provision that the vote. "sh.Il
forthwith proceed into one Of the COM
partments and shall then and
therein mark his balloe' is merely di-
re,tory and not mandatory Let the dis
tinction between these terms be under
stood. Sutherland. on statutory consti-
tuition. says: The consequential dis
tinction between directory and manda-
tory statutes is that the violation Of the
former is attended with no consequences.
while failure to comply with the -e-
quirements OF the other is productive of
serious results" Bishop on Stat Grimes.
section 254 A statute is called man
dstory when. II not all Of lis provisions
are complied with according TO their
terms, the thing done is. as TO il. void
While the statute directs that the voter
.hsll mark his ballot while in one of the
compartments. il is silent as 10 the CON
sequences If the ballot be not there
marked. In some OF the states the cleo
tion officers are required 10 decline bal
lots that are not prepared strictly in sc-
oordnnce with the statutory directions.
Not 40 in Hawaii. There is nothing TO
vitIste the ballot or the vote at the pre-
cinct II any number of voters should
choose 10 mark their ballots while out
eide of the little compartments, though
within the prescribed enclosure 80 that
20 accommodate the crush of voters
some OF them could use table or the
vail or book on which they could mark
their ballots.
The provision for the secret cou,part-
rent is a privilege intended for the voter
and 20 protect him in preparing a secret
ballot The public has an interest in this
secrecy only to the extent that the right
may be exercised at the option of rhe in.
dividual voter. 1t is right which the
voter may insist upon and il is the duty
Of the election officers to see that he is
so accommodated But il is also a privi-
lege which he may waive. The sanctity
of the ballot and the fairne.. of he cleo
tion are not involved in the failure TO
observe this method There is nothing
about it that could possibly void the
vote al the precinct where the plan was
put into operation.
Bearing in mind that there must be
stretch of terms somewhere to get in all
OF the votes. the method described In
wolves the least possible danger-nay. II
is believed 10 be absolutely safe as
against legal attack.
In the Illinois supreme court il was
held that il votes were cast at the polls
after the hour of closing. sufficient 10
change the result, the irregularity is
fatal. pratt V People. % Ills. 54.)
The supreme court of Minnesota held
that the votes OF a precinct will be re
jected if there is evidence that votes were
cast after the hour of closing. (46
MINI. PA
Mere Irregularities will not vitiate the
votes at precinct. Paine on Elections.
p. 42i. says that a mere irregularity |
in conducting an election. which does |
not deprive legal voter of his vote. or
admit a disqualified voter 10 vote. or cast !
on the result and has not |
heen occasioned by the agency of party |
seeking 10 derive benefit from it. should |
be overlooked in a proceeding to try the
right TO an Office depending on such elec-
ion"
In Vol IS, Century Edition. American
Digest. there is long list of cases cited
o support the proposition that IAN elec-
ion is not invalidated by an irregularity
which is not shown to have effected the
esult."
While the keeping open of the polls
fter the regular hour of closing could
fleet the result. any variance in the uuin-
.er or absence Of voting compartments
ould not possibly affect the result In
his connection the supreme court of
he state Of Washington held The
act that the election officers failed 20
ave booths erected which complied with
he lsw. found in the eighth finding. was
n irresularity which could NOT viti.te
be election" tMoyer v. Van De Van
er. 80 Am St Rep. an0l
SCRIPTS LEGIBUS.