New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1903-12-22
DEFECTIVE BALLOTS.

Probably no ballot law which depends on sew
eral thousand poll clerks, many of them hair
educated for its enforcement viii ever give
perfectly fair election. 1t is extremely dill
cult to get the average man TO understand and
act upon the most simple and explicit instruc-
tons about anything with which he is not IA
miliar. Send him paper with the clearest
statement Of how he is to ill in the blanks, and
the chance is ten to one that he Will do IT
wrong. So it is not remarkable that the cleo
ton count is often bungled. Yet if the condi-
tons observed by Mr.. Charles S. Hartwell in
one of the districts of Brooklyn, and recounted
in several publications, prevail elsewhere there
is need Of much more explicit instruction and
much strlcter discipline of the election officers.
The law concerning marked ballots is per-
fectly definite and mandatory. 1t permits the
counting of nothing but a single cross, either
in the circle above the party column or in the
space before the name Of an individual candt-
date. The double cross or any other mark in
validates the ballot. Mr. Hartwell, neVerthe-
less reports that in the district where he was
q watcher many ballots were counted which did
not conform to the law. Most Of the marks
consisted of two lines crossed by one. Some
times the two lines were parallel, but the dupH-
cation could not be accounted for, as some of
the inspectors urged, by blunt pencil. Some
times there were three generally parallel lines,
sometimes two in each direction, and some
times crossed letter V. Possibly these defec-
tive markings were due to the laundering of
the voter, and not to any purpose of marking
the ballot for identification; but as the law
stands, the motive of the voter in such case
is no concern Of the inspectors. Yet even this
excuse cannot be found for some Of the ballots
counted. In addition TO the cross, single or
double, they contained dots or dashes within
the circle, which, whether or not intended to
secure Identification would perfectly serve that
purpose Nevertheless, all Of these ballots were
finally counted, Notwithstanding protests and
appeals to the requirements Of the law. The
law was also viola ted by the failure to place
the protested ballots in q separate package The
inspectors, with the law put plainly before
them, contemptuously ignored It. At first they
showed a difference Of opinion about some of
the ballots, but when the Democratic district
captain threatened mandamus proceedings IN
less they were counted everybody but the Citi-
zens Union watchers surrendered and allowed
the plainly Illegal ballots to be counted without
even certifying the protest against them
How general this sort of counting may be it
is difficult to determine without the report OF
other watchers. We fear, however, that loose
methods widely prevail, and that political press
ure often exercises a stronger influence than
the statutory mandate. Possibly we shall never
overcome that difficulty until voting is reduced
TO a mere mechanical process and counting be-
comes automatic In due time that will come
Meanwhile there always will be difficulty in
saying how far the inspectors should 20 in Civ
ing effect to the intent OF voter who has
bunglingiy marked his ballot. That discretion.
however should never be permitted TO validate
plainly forbidden markings. IF q double cross
is TO be allowed why not triangle or circle?