The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1906-10-27
They MUST CHOOSE.
Ballot Fixed So That Railroad Inter-
ests Are Pleased:

In an opinion written yesterday, At
torney General c. G. Coleman holds
that there is no way by which the yot-
Z tiers of Kansas can cast their ballots Tor
i George Kanavel Republican candidate
for railroad commissioner, and James
Humphrey, Democratic candidate Tor
railroad commissioner.
This ruling will cause JOY to the rail-
road interests of the state, because
kanayel and Humphrey are the two
Z candidates most favored by the anti
railroad interests and Coleman's rul-
ing means that they can not both be
I elected.
The names of the candidates on the
ballot appear in this manner:
{ REPUBLICAN DEMOCRATIC
Ryker Mcmillan
KanaveI Humphrey
/ General Coleman holds that Ryan
{ is running against Cooper, Ryker
against Mcmillan ana Kanavel against
Humphrey. He says that a voter can
not select any three of these candi-
dates. and can not vote for two whose
names happen to appear as opposed
both Kanavel and Humphrey are
marked with a cross, the vote can not
4 be counted for either.
This is Mr.. Coleman's opinion, writ
4 ten in response to requests received
4 from Geo. w. Kanavel and ]. L. Bris-
tow, of SaIina:
Hon. J. L. Bristow. Salina, Kan.
My Dear Sir:-I have your favor en-
! closing me a marked sample ballot as
you say marked by a gentleman who
wishes to vote for Humphrey, Kanavel
and Ryker for railroad commissioners
and I note your inquiry as to whether
or not the ballot is legally marked.
Il note that the voter in question has
made a cross mark in the circle at the
head of the Republican ticket and in
addition thereto has made cross mark
opposite the names Of Ryker and Kama
vel on the Republican ticket, and OPP
posite the name Of James Humphrey on
! the Democratic ticket, and I find no
other marks anywhere upon the ballot
George W. Kanavel and of James
/ Humphrey are opposite to each other
on the two tickets.
Under the law, as it stood prior to
/ 1905, it is probable that the ticket so
/ marked could have been legally count
ed for the three names marked, but for
! the mark In the circle. and possibly
/ any difference. But I cali your atten-
| ton to the following paragraphs ap-
pearing in the amendment of the cleo
-tiOn law Of 1906:
Second, subdivision of the instruc-
/ tiCns to voters, laws of 1906 page 1854:
Second, If you prefer not to vote
straight party ticket, make a cross (x)
mark in the circle as before, and then
mark in the circle as before, and then
/ make a cross (x) mark on the square
to the right of the names Of such other
candidates as you wish to vote for
found under any other party name
/ Also same book, page $40.
I " When a voter has properly marked
/ his ballot in the circle at the head Of
the ticket the marking of the names by
a proper cross mark in all, or part Of
the squares to the right of the names
on the same ticket shall not prevent
the counting of such ticket
Also, on page 367:
If the voter prefers not to vote
taN lob o~+~- - -
cross mark in the circle and then make
a cross mark in the square to the right
/ of the names of such other candida ties
as he may wish to vote for. found IN
der the same or any other party
name, or Independent nomination.
ALSO, on page $50;
" Whenever any party convention
shall nominate candidates for presiden-
tial electors. justices Of the supreme
court, or railroad commissioners. such
candidates shall be nominated one at a
time, and shall be placed on the
official ballot in the order in which they
are certified to the secretary Of state,
and the candidates so nominated and so
certified shall be construed to be- and
shall become candidates opposed to
each other for such Office as certified,
in the order In which they are certified
to the said secretary of state
Also on page 36T:
Whenever. a cross Cx) mark shall
be made IN the square at the right of
the names Of more than one candidate
for the same office. such vote shall not
invalidate the ballot. nor shall the
same be counted for any such candi-
date
"All four of these quoted paragraphs
are new features Of the election law
made by the amendment, and the last
two seriously affect the question sub
mitted by your friend. Prior to 1905,
the theory was that where more than
one person is to be elected to the same
/ Office, such as supreme court judges, or
2 one ticket shall be considered as oppos-
5 ed to any particular person on the op-
posite ticket, but the three candidates
} for railroad commissioner receiving the
2 highest number of votes, upon what
! ever ticket, would be held to be the