Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1903-05-28

the insufticiency of the complaint raised
on the demurrer intcrposed by the answer.
Should the demurrer be oveiruled, how
ever it remains only to be considered
whether out of the 24S ballots In dispute
there could he added enough to the re-
lators vote to overcome the vote Tor the
respondent This is impossible. A proper
construction of our statute in the light
of the obvious duties that rcst upon tho
voter himself forbds such result. the
demands of public policy requiring the
absolute secrecy and purity of the ballot
and that no opportunity be afforded for
corruption through any device whatever
forbid it. The promotion of civic intelli-
gence and the preservation of civic virtue
forbids it, Unless the relator can secure
the count of the 16S ballots marked in the
squares at the head Of both the demoratic
and local option tickets he cannot prevail
The provisions of our statute must
govern and these are explicit. simple and
reasonable. The ticket of each political
party must he arranged in separate col
umns on the ballot and the voter has di-
rections for two ways TO express his
choice. These directions are simple. but
they are mandatory and any unnecessary
or deliberate and intentional departure
from the directions calls for the rejec-
ticn of the ballot. If through careless
ness or nervous haste. ignorance or in
advertence the voter fails of exact COM
plianCe vet If his choice can be fairly
determined his vote is counted.
This is not the case touching the bal
lots under consideration. Here was a de-
liherate and intentional violation of the
mandate of the law and it is not for the
voter to complain If he is disfranchised
by his own deliberate act.
Numerous cases in support of this posi-
ton were quoted and it was urged that
there is no provision of the statute that
can be tortured into a justification of a
voter deliberately voting two tickets and
then expecting his ballot to be counted.
The saving provisions of the statute
bearing upon this point are for the pro-
lection of the voter against his innocent
mistakes or inadvertency, and not to aid
or encourage him in wllful. deliberate
violation of the mandate of law. No
plausible reason can be suggested for
such double marking and the presump-
tior must obtain that such marking was
for n corrupt and dishonest purpose. The
voter intended to do just what he did
when he marked in the squares at the
head of the two tCkets-vote both tickets.
Tho invaldity of a ballot SO marked is
Just as absolute now as it ever was and
tho counting of such a ballot is still with
in the inhibition of the statute.
Under our statute but one ticket can
be voted. since by providing how one
may be voted it forbds voting again
Double marking of a ballot manifestly
not only violates the statute directing
how it should be marked but the law is
well settled that the ballot is thereby
annulled and cannot be counted. A voter
may not vote two tickets and have any
tribunal find that he meant to vote only
one.
Final adjournment of supreme court
will be reached tomorrow morning. A de-
| cision on the test case as to whether
Judges of city courts and justices Of the
peace can send men to the House of Cor
rection as an alternative sentence for q
| fine and costs for second offence Of in
toXication is expected tomorrow morn,
ing and possibly one on the road commits
sioners case from the town of Leicester