The Grangeville globe. [volume] (Grangeville, Idaho) 1907-1922, 1910-04-21


vertence, Indifference or positive
opinion, refrained from or refused
to indicate his second choice, what
possible effect could that have in
law or reason, upon the expression
of his first choice?
"As lawyers are wont to express
it-let us inquire into the reason and
spirit of the act. There are con-
flicting opinions among public econ
omists as to practical effectiveness
OF the second choice rule. Those in
favor of it contend that where there
is a multiplicity of candidates, some
one of the candidates might receive
plurality, or the highest vote cast,
but the total number of his votes
as they stood in relation to the to-
tai votes cast might be so inconsid-
cradle as not to reasonably indicate
the will of a sufficient majority of
those desiring to avail themselves of
the privilege of voting. In other
words, it is an attempted escape
from the evils of a plurality vote as
distinguished from a majority vote.
What the Law Provides.
"The legislature of the state of Ida
no in this act has provided that if
none of the candidates receive a ma
jority of the votes cast for that Of
flee, the second choice vote shall
ing the largest number of first and
second choice votes shall be declar-
ed the choice of the people. We d.
rect your attention to the fact that
at no place in the act is it provided
that the indication of a second choice
is mandatory. The act is mandatory
to the extent that it does provide
that ballots shall have placed upon
them an instruction to the voter to
indicate his first and second choice.
This, we have shown, however, must
certainly be interpreted as merely ex-
tending a privilege to voter, of
which he may avail himself or not,
as his inclination directs him.
1--WE further direct your attention
to the fact that there is no clause of
vote for first choice unless a Sec
ond choice is likewise indicated
1--WE do not doubt but what there
may have been some decisions by
the courts of some states upon this
proposition, but so far as we have
not been able to find them If they
exist.
Decisions Supporting Contention.
There are, however, any number
of decisions in support of those po-
sitions which we have indicated. and
upon which premises we have based
our opinion. For instance, as indi-
cative of the tenor of the decisions,
that the evident of the voter must
govern, the facts in an Illinois case
were briefly as follows: There was
to be an election for school directors
at which two directors were to be
eelcted one for an unexpircd term
and one for long term. There were
only two candidates. The instructions
upon the ballot were to the effect
that the voter should indicate which
candidate he voted for for the long
term, and which for the unexpired
term. A ballot was cast in which a
voter wrote after the name of one
of the candidates the words, long
term but failed to indicate for what
term he intended to vote for the
other candidate. In a contest an at
tempt was made to cast out this vote
upon the dictatorship. but the court,
while not deciding as to the effect
upon the second candidate of the
omission just mentioned, ruled that
the vote for the director after whose
name the words long term appear
ed should be counted. Page VS.. Kuy-
kenhall, 80 L. r. A. 656. 43 N. E.,
1114
The Montana courts have held
that statutory provisions as to voting
are to be considered as directory
only, unless they are expressly de-
clared to be mandatory, or by clear
inference were necessarily intended
to be so. Dickerman VS.. Goldsthorpe,
10 Mont, AZ Pac., 999.
This court also holds that a bal
lot which is marked in substantial
compliance with the law and clearly
indicates the intent and choice of
the voter must he counted unless tho