The St. Louis Republic., 1904-06-17
THE VOTERS LINE

Judge Moore's obiter remarks in the LAWN case
last week present an important question to the pub
lie although tho average citizen has special con-
cern respecting that part of the ruling strictly relat
ing to the facts presented. The Judge discharged
the defendant upon the ground that no case had
blen made the principal witnesses refusing to tes-
fy on the ground that their answers would tend to
incriminate them. However much 1t may be re-
gretted that testimony was shut Of in this manner
the Judges duty clear If the evidence available
did not support the charge.
But Judge Moores declaration that there is no
law providing for the formation of line of voters
that voter has right In the line than
other, and thatlh one man can crowd ahead of an
other be has that privilege raises important sub
ject for consideration and discussion This question
is broader than any issue that coudr under the
eectionlaws of the State as it affects the power of
the police to enforce reasonable regulations and
orderly manner of procedure whenever people gather
in crowds. not only at the polls, but any of the
many other occasions which arise from day to day.
1t is, perhaps, possible to find warrant for the
view taken by Judge Moore IL consideration is con-
fined to the election statute of the State The for
nation Of voting line is undoubtedly not covered
by any specific provisions of the statutes but it is
provided that any person hindering or in any man.
ner whatsoever obstructing another in the exercise
of his privilege at the polls shall be held guilty of
misdemeanor and subject to punishment. Whether
1t is specifically provided in the law not it is none
the less fact that every voter has legal right to
vote in his proper turn as determined by the order
of his approach to the polls This right Is not only
confirmed by universal custom, but lies in the very
essence Of things and court need not seek for q
formal declaration by statute.
This common rule of order the police enforce
and guide crowds Of people moving to common
point 1t is unreasonable to say that the police act
without authority and that the courts have no power
to punish offenders who have been guilty of disor.
derly conduct.
OF course man Ia obliged to get into liue, when
he goes to the polls to vote but 1t doesn't follow that
he can shove and push himself ahead of other vot-
ers in order to vote "out of turn" And it is no
strainng of language to say that the man who does
SO shove and push himself before others obstructs,
hinders and delays voters in the literal sense of the
election statute. While the law does not compel
man to be gentleman, or make it an offense to vo-
late the conventional rules of good manners it does
aim to preserve order and to punish the disor1ery
That form of disorderly conduct which the law
Furnishes misdemeanor Is not so comprehensive
ly and minutely defined in the statutes that the
courts take cognizance only Of such acts are
70 pe touhd specncHiy SET Aortn III tne Ieer OF the
law. Judges and jures are expected to enforce the
law in a spirit Of reasonableness and common sense
which win give effect to the intent as well as to the
letter OF the statute.
1t is quite possible that the LAWN case. it was
presented before Judge Moore gave opportunity for
no other action than that the court adopted. It Is
unfortunate if this was the case for LAWNS inva-
sion of the Twenty-eighth Ward on the occasion Of
the Democratic primaries was such an unqualified
outrage that he should not go unwhipf of justice 1t