The evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1907-1908, 1907-09-30
MANDAMUS
ISSUED TO
FREEMAN
Justice Swayze Decides lie
Is Entitled to Demo-
cratic Vote.
Especial to the Evening star.l

TRENTON. Sept. 30.-In an opinion
filed in the Supreme Court today. JUS
tice Swayze orders a ~peremptory writ
of mandamus to issue against the
Beard of Registry and Election Of
Metuchen, compelling them to certify
that DIR. Charles NJ. Freeman was the
regular Democratic nominee for Mayor
of Metuchen.
In the opinion IL appears that Free
man was one of the regular candidates
on the Republican ticket, n had as
his opponent Jesse Jackson. Freeman,
anticipating that he would not receive
the Republican nomination, persuaded
a great number OF Democrats to vote
for Aim in the Democratic ballot box.
When the primary had closed 1t was
ascertained that Jackson had defeated
Freeman FOR the Republican nomina-
ton, bpt at the same time. Freeman
recepyed more Democratic votes in the
BOX of the latter party than the regular
-Democratic nominee.
The election of officers. it appears,
refused to certify that Freeman had
received the Democratic nomination on
the ground that he was a Republican.
This view Justice Swayze does not
cor u in, and he directs the board to
certify tina Freeman received the
Democratic nomination for the office of
Mayor o. Metuchen. In his opinion
Justice s'wayze says in part:
1t Is conceded that the board failed 90
sign a statement of the result of the pri-
mary. This Of itself requires that a man
damus should issue. In defense of the
board, it is said that 1t is impossible to
make such a statement as the law requires.
If so the impossibility has been created By
the board and Its members cannot be al
lowed 10 escape the performance of their
duty in that way. They might as well
burn the ballots before counting them and
then seek to exculpnte themselves by
blending that they had nothing to count. .
4 am by no means sure that they can
not prepare a statement without opening
Nthe ballot boxes" continued Justice
Swayze, but if that course is necessary 1t
max be taken, but such a proceeding is
not a recount. The board had no right to
reject these ballots ms marked"
In dealing with the contention of the
board that the ballots were marked be-
cause they were all written in the same
hand and that the voter should write the
name himself, Justice Swayze says is with
out merit. Such a requirement would
thwart the very purpose of the law, which
is to secure secrecy of the ballot; It would
be equivalent to requiring a voter who
wished to alter his ballot to put his auto
graph thereon.
Continuing, he says that, assuming
Freeman was a Republican. he finds moth
inc in the act to prevent Democrats from
voting for him at their own primary.
There are provisions. of course, which
prevent the name of a Republican from
being placed on official Democratic ballots
at the primary. Nor is there anything in
the general object OF the act Of 1903
which, s~ustains the defendants. That OBJ
ject is accomplished when 1t is made sure
that each voter shall vote only once ct
a primary election In whichever box he
may choose. "a act was never meant
to entrust to an election board the power
to determine without q hearing to what
party a man belongs, and as a result OF
thai determination to reject ballots hon.
estly cast for him.