The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1911-10-11

organizations which have the most
remote or shadowy chance OF electing
their nominees are given equal rights
with those of the great parties, while the
inviolable right of every elector is secured
by the blanket column. But IL the char
acter of the ballot necessarily involves
discrimination against certain classes
or bodies of electors il is a reason that the
statute should not increase the discrim-
nation.
CORRUPT TRADING NOT INVOLVED.
1T has been urged in justification of the
statutory provisions before us that inde-
pendent bodies are oftenorg aniz I'd for the
sake of trading or combining with the
regular parties or other organizations
on corrupt considerations. 1t is not pre-
tended. however, that the statute tends
to prev ent that evil. save in one way.
by max ing it more difficult to vote fusion
or coalition tickets. The same argument
was advanced in The Callahan case where
II was held that the Legislature could not
constitutiona!ly prevent the nomination
of fusion or combination candidates.
We there said,
The liberty Of the electors in the
exercise of the right vested in them by the
Constitution to choose public officers
on whatever principles or dictated by
whatever motive they see fit. udless those
motives contravene common morality
and are therefore criminal such as bribery.
violence. intimidation or fraud. cannot
be denied.
The Legislature might make combina-
tions effected by bribery or illegal con-
siderations criminal and punish the actors.
On proof that an organization was effected
and nominations made in pursuance of
such criminal bargains the courts might
he authorized to strike such nominations
from the ballot. But because many coal-
tions between various bodies of electors
are corrupt and criminal 1t cannot forbid
coalition nominations or indirectly eject
the same thing by rendering IL more
,, difficult TO vote for coalition nominee.
"One great object of the present ballot
YVES to prevent bribery by rendering it
difficult to determine how any elector
voted Ther. is, however. an opportu-
nifty for Identification left, The elector
msy. in the blank column. write the name
of some particular candidate and thus
identify his vote. Undoubtedly the voter
NAV be punished for 80 doing on proof
of the unlawful purpose for which he wrote
tunetely the evil does not seem at all
common. But even il it were prevalent
. to correct the evil the inalienable right
of the elector to vote for whom he chooses
could not be invaded
The method Of voting on an official
ballot which has prevailed with us now
for a number Of years probably has cor
rected evils that were prevalent But
personally fear that in some respects
it has undermined public morality on the
question of the right of the eiector "a
vote for whom he will, provided it is dc
tated by no criminal consideration.
Ever since the adoption Of the present
. ho. banv - 20,
,ide a ballot in such form as to prevent
the elector from voting in the way he
wis he'd to vote In This cons tant effort
! it must he conceded hat persons de-
sirous of so-called ballot reform. and not
political partisans. have been the most
active, though by the present legislation
the latter seam to have been more sue
ceesful All labors by a citizen to induce
his fellow citizens to change the principle
on which they cast their votes when he
believes that principle Is injurious to the
welfare of the community are praise
worthy and patriotic. But however gross
may be the error Of his fellows he has nc
moral right to correct that error by max
ing il difficult for them to exercise their
constitutional rights"
PERSONAL REGIsTRATIoN PROVISION.
| In his opinion declaring against tn {
! law compelling personal registration in
the rural districts Judge Vann says;
We think that the Constitution in pro-
viding that voters residing in rural dis
tricts shall not be required to apply in
person at the first meeting of the officers
having charge of the registry of voters
! necessarily implies that such voters may
be registered at that meeting without
applying in person. We quote the last
sentence of the constitutional provision
In cities and villages having 5000 inhahi-
tants, or more, voters snail be rrtist cred
upon personal application oa'v, but
voters not residing in such cities or vii
lagos shall not he required to apply in
person for registration at the first meet
ing of the officers having charge of the
registry of voters.
This is single sentence consisting
OF two clauses which must ne read to-
gether in order to discover the malnin Z
| OF the sentence as whole. The entire
sentence divides voters into two classe
depending on the political division in
which they reside, The first clause ap-
plies exclusively to voters who reside in
| cities or villages with the population
named. and expressly restricts the reg
istratiOn Of that class TO such as apply
in person. The second clause applies ex =
clusively to voters who do not reside in
such cities or villages and impliedly per
mits the registration of that class at the
first meeting of the officers III charge with
out personal application, The second
| clause commences with the word But,
which as thus used indicates transition
of thought or a change in the nature of
| the rule, and reading on we find the change
! to be shat voters residing in country dis
tricts need not apply in person a, the first
meeting.
While the Legislature may provide
that an application must be made by n
voter of either class II cannot provide
that those belonging to the second or
such as reside in rural sections. shall
apply in person on the first, day, although
| it may require them to apply by letter, or
through an agent. or in any reasonable
way that it sees At. other than by per-
sonal application. ,
"ihe ooy ous rcrscn for the distinction
is thu. rerson,l arpearsnoe before tho
boerd is much less cen, enient in thN q
ioos lites where many Of the eleetcrt liz o,
fer from tho place Of registration. 'han
in cities and villages where they live COM