New-York tribune., 1906-03-27
A DAYS DOINGSIN NEW JERSEY.
CLOSE WINS RECOUNT.
MAJORITY NOW II TOTES.
{. 4sa Francis Defeated for Sheriff
of Monmouth County.

VI 1OUNtOAtt 1OUHJ4.
Freehold March Is CspeciaD.-Justice Charlie
E. Hendrckson this morning rendered his de
cison the invalidity OF two classes OF re
served ballots that had been reserved in specia
classes in the Monmouth County Shrievalty re
count fight. discarding the whole number Of bal
lots In reserve and electing Charles E. Close
the Democratic candidate for the Office. Close
was apparently defeated at the election in No
vember by c. Asa Francis C2ep) by a majority
OF s.. The decision rendered by Justice Hen
erickson to-day makes net loss OF - for Fran
els and gives Close a majority of IA.
There are stin about four hundred ballots to
be reviewed by Justice Hendrickson in seven
boxes in Wall and Upper Freehold townships,
but It is admitted by counsel for both parties
that M. Close VIII make slight gains in each Of
these districts and thus give him safe major
ity- The recount OF the remainder Of the ballots
In dispute viii probably be resumed next Mon
day, and Mr.. Close. II is thought viii take his
seat as Sheriff the latter part OF next week.
Justice Hendricksons decision in full follows:
There are two classes Of ballots that have been
laid aside by mutual consent during the progress
OF lhe recount 10 be considered together and.
having heard the argument Of counsel thereon.
am now required TO rule as to their legality.
Lhese ballots are objected 10 by counsel for the
contestant, on the ground that they contain dis
unguishing marks which, under the law, render
them void ballots that they cannot be
counted. The enactment on this subject win be
found IN Section l5S Of the act 10 regulate cleo
ti0ns C2ev) 1898 ID. 1S9S, 2. BIO.
The paragraph Of the section relating to bal
lois reads as follows: IF any ballot voted at
any election shall have thereon, either on its
iace or back. any mark. sign. designation or de-
wee whatsoever other than is permitted by this
act, whereby such ballot or may be identi-
fed or distinguished from other ballots cast at
% s-SH HeCLoI. sLch ballot shall be absolutely
void and shall not be canvassed or counted for
any candidate named thereon"
The first class Of ballots now 70 DE ruled upon
IN the west district of the township Of Shrews-
bury. These ballots all contain upon their face
a small curved line, black in color. near the end
of and slightly below the line Of the name Of one
OF the candidates for assistant town commits |
siOner- The marks upon the several tickets /
10 character and location seem TO be precisely /
alike, and after careful inspection I feel sat /
lsfied that the mark printed with the ballot /
of ihe other class OF tickets there are about /
hfty-one in number. far as the canvass has /
no" proceeded, and they were voted mainly in |
Ilt elecllon districts or the township or Raritan
They are al found 10 contain blue marks upon F..
and along the top edge OF the ballots: in no case
upon the sides or bottom edges Of the same
After careful inspection ! am inclined TO believe
that these marks were made with soft blue /
pencil by rubbing the pencil across the top Of a
package OF the ballots.
The ballots with the black mark all contain
the name OF the incumbent for Sheriff. Those I
with the blue marks were also with two or
tilree exceptions, Tor the incumbent, two or three
OF them being for the contestant. All Of these
marks, the black as well as the blue, seem TO be /
vel adapted for use as distinguishing marks, for
at a casual glance they might not be noticed, but
quite plainly perceptible 70 one looking care
fully at the ticket And I think there can be no |
question that they are such marks as Ordi-
naTtly, under the law. must invalidate the bal
lots. But It is suggested by counsel that the
marks alluded TO may be accidental, and that
unless clearly convinced 20 the contrary the
voter should not be deprived OF his right Of
suffrage II the printed mark IN question ap-
peared 10 be an accidental one. Ike quad" or
line mark, well known printers marks
would be inclined 10 permit the ballots contain
ing them 10 be counted: but think it plainly
appears that the mark in question Is not an acci-
dental mark, but one designedly placed upon the
ticket
II has been suggested also that the blue marks
may have been placed there in the printers Of
fee IN some accidental way, but there IS moth
ing before to Justify such Inference.
To conclude otherwise would be 10 accuse
the County Clerk. who by the statute is charged
with the preparing and distribution Of the bal
lots among the various municipalities, Of at
least Culpable negligence in the performance Of
nus cGues nc Ia" IaLleI VIII presume, u +
The absence u evidence 10 the contrary, that ,
public officers have properly performed the
duties required Of them
Ny duties are ministerial only. and have been ,
defined to be 10 recount the votes, re-examine
and redetermine the result upon an inspection
of the ballots cast C6esrns agr. L J /. j u: /
Weeks agr Kip. 1- 30 Vt CD. IN this situation
see no escape from the conclusion that these /
ballots contain DISTINGUISHING marks designadI,y
placed upon them The view that these marks ,
were uesigne1ly placed upon the ballots is rein }
forced by the fact that 50 many ~ them were z
voted and practically IN the same locality. It .
IS with reluctance that ] have come To this con-
clusign. because as a result perhaps some voters
Nh" were innocent may be deprived of their a
votes, but The law is ineNorable and must be {
enforced And as Justice Reed said ir Passing ]
lp"A me constifguonalty Of the paragraph OF
The section ] have quoted iD Ransom agt Black I
- VI 44G. the objection q the cOnstitutOnalitv q
Or This act lecause the voter may lose his bal j
lot hE the fraud or neglect II those preparing !
me ballot is not sound. that the most stringent i
directions are given respecting the preparation II
of the official ballots. and the law presurnes that
uey VIII be obeyed. The result is that the bal a
lots IN question must be treated as void and can
not De counted [
in the recount of ballots iH Allentown Borough 7
Close lost four leaving IFS majority at a The p
count Wiz be resumed Monday. April .. and il is q
admitted by both parties thar Close viii gain d d
about fifteen more IN districts Yet 10 be coupted