Evening bulletin. [volume] (Honolulu [Oahu, Hawaii]) 1895-1912, 1906-04-14

slblc by the use Of the telephone and
special messengers, that they were
making mistakes. After the polls
were closed some Of them undertook
To correct those mistakes by removing
the numbers from such ballots before
they were counted. or. at all events,
before they were opened and credited
to tho several candidates. or these bal
lots from which the numbers were
removed there were 1900. leaving 9.
927 on which the numbers were allow.
cd 10 remain. Tho counsel for the
cOntcstce in their briefs and nrgu.
mcnts admitted that these 1927 bal.
lOts were void and should he rejected
from the count. But they insisted
that the 1900 ballots from which the
numbers had been removed were valid
and should he counted. With his con.
clusion your committee can not agree.
II tho 1897 ballots from which the
numbers were not removed were void,
We are OF the opinion that the 1900
from which the numbers were rcmov.
cd were void also. Those ballots were
cast when they were deposited In the
boxes. and II void then nothing which
the election officers did afterwards
could make them valid.
Section 95 Of the Hawaiian election
law provides that:
"All questions ms to the validity Of
any ballot shall be decided immediate.
". and the opinion Of majority OF
the inspectors shall be final and bind.
Ing. subject to revision by the Supreme
Court as herein provided"
inspectors Can't Change.
But this does not permit the inspect
ors To add TO- take from. or change
any ballot nor Is any power or liscrc
tion to do that given them anywhere
In the law. They must pass on the
validity of ballot and return II just
ns II Is, with their decision thereon
subject to revision by the Supreme
Court. Open the door and permit cleo
ton inspectors, after the polls arc
closed. TO NEEDLE with the ballots
even to correct their own mistakes
and no one can tell what the abuse ol
that discretion may lead to- The du
ties of such inspectors are and should
he strictly ministerial. There should
be no relaxation Of the law In this re
gard. They should be required tC
carefully follow the statute. leaving
disc, etionary power II at all. to tho
court or reviewing boards. This pro
cedGrc Is APT to secure more uniform
ity ana safer results. II the election
inspectors had the right to remove the
numbers from tho 1900 ballots nnt
count them, II may be argued with
considerable force that the canvnssinI
board had right to remove the mum
bcrs from the 2.927 ballots and coun
them.
5,t27 Ballots Void.
We therefore reject 5.l27 ballots NJ
void Doducting these from the tota
of II 800 II leaves 6,SG3 valid ballots
or these. contestee received i.0g7
Gonto slant. l,57S; Mr.. Motley. l,1SS.
Tic contcstee received n plurnllt,
over contestant of 1913. ana major
ity ever all OF l 1881. We are OF tn
option, after a careful examination
of the record, that the Secretary o
State intended no wrong In preparing
the ballots In the manner described
nor do we find that conspiracy wal
entci ed into for party success b.
means OF fraud or intimidation. w
believe that the depositing OF the bal
lots without detaching the number
was done by mistake and misappro
hcnslon ON the part Of the election In
spectors, and not through any desigl
or concerted plan to commit an
: wrong against the contestant or an,
other candidate. An examination q
the returns confirms this' view. On
would naturally expect, Il there wa
a scheme devised for the purpose q
intimidating voters TO support col
! testce. that he would have received a
lmduly large proportion OF the vote
=, where such scheme was carried GU
: who: cas- the contrary appears to b
the TACT, for his percentage Of the vol
aud rejected ballots was not as larg
as Of all the ballots cast, nor was
y as large as his percentage of the vail
y ballots.
Your committee docs not find In tn
;, record sufficient evidence of intimldi
: ton, fraud, corruption, or irregular
' ties of any kind to Justify II In unsca
ing the contostee or In setting asid
= the election.
In conclusion your committee r
!, sneC fully recommend to the House I
y Repi that the election law
of the Territory OF Hawaii he s
b. amcrded and supplemented as to pr
wide definitely for the election of
y Delegate to the Congress.
(H. Res. No. 37S.)
q Resolved, That Curtis p. Tauke
e the contestant, was not elected a D'
/ ~. to 4. l,,th Tpp
- the Territory Of Hawaii"
IL (H. Res. No. 379)
10 "Resolycd, That Jonah X. Kalanl
a. naole. the cOntestce, was duly olect'
4. Delegate to the FIfty-ninth Congre