New Ulm review. (New Ulm, Brown County, Minn.) 1892-1961, 1915-09-15
JUDGE OLSEN FILES DECISION
WHICH RENDERS REDWOOD
DRY.
SMALL MATTERS PROVE TO BE
oFvITAL IMPORT IN THIS
CASE.


by Judge Olsen on Friday, the report
and certificate OF the County Canvassing
Board of Redwood County declaring
the result of the County Option election
of that County to be that the majority
of the votes cast at said election were in
favor of prohibiting the sale of intoxi-
eating liquors in said County stands
affirmed.
It will be remembered that on the 7th
day Of June, 1915, a special election
was duly held in and for Redwood
County for the purpose of determining
whether the sale of liquor in said County
should be prohibited or not. At that
election the Canwassing Board on June
9th certified and returned that of the
1903 ballots actually cast 1904 votes
Were cast in favor of prohibiting the
sale of intoxicating liquors in said County
and 1899 votes were cast against pro-
hibiting such sale, thus giving the County
to the drys by 3 votes. Shortly after
the result OF the election was announced
Paul. Doepke contested it and the case
was heard at Redwood Falls August
18th, 1915, at a special term of the
District Court of Redwood County.
At the time of the trial ga ballots were
referred to the Court as doubtful and
disputed. OF these disputed ballots the
Court gave % to the drys, 29 to the vets,
one was found wholly blank, Z ballots,
on account of being mismarked, were
entered ;as mo choice" and 5 were
absolutely rejected. Besides that, two
other ballots were rejected. These did
not appear in the exhibits. They were
the vote of E. E. Gaylord who voted
in the election precinct of Lucan and
cast a ballot against prohibiting the
sale of liquor on account OF his not
having been a legal voter Of the precinct,
and the vote of Jos. Hammerschmidt
who voted in the election precinct Of
Wahasso, whose vote was rejected be-
cause he disclosed the contents of his
ballot within the polling place and booth,
contrary to the provisions of law. The
Judge held that the judges of election
were not authorized to receive the
ballots in question. The other rejected
ballots were those of Christ Wester,
Louis Nicholson, Walter Christensen,
H. M. Hoffman, and Gus. Montgomery.
The first two voted in favor of pro-
hibiting the sale Of liquor and the latter
three each cast a ballot against pro-
hibiting the sale of liquor. The court
rejected each of the ballots because the
parties wrote their names upon their
ballots and thereby identified and dis
closed their contents within the meaning
of the law.
In its memorandum the court finds
that the total number of ballots in the
envelopes of all precincts was 1903 the
same as found by the inspectors; of this
total number the Canvassing Board had
rejected five and counted 1888 ballots.
Judge Olsen rejected two more ballots,
the one where the voter unquestionably
was not legal voter of the precinct
he voted in and the other for exhibiting
his ballot before he deposited it in the
ballot box, reducing the total number
of lawful ballots to 1896, half of which
would be 1883 votes, The total votes
cast in favor of prohibiting the sale of
Intoxicating liquors is given at 1899 and
it would appear therefore that the
county option forces carried Redwood
County by a majority of vote. Where
ever the intention Of the voter was
reasonably clear the Court decided not
to disfranchise the voter by invoking
any technical rule. For that reason
the Court counted as valid ballots, those
where check mark was used instead Of
an x, or an arrow head, or nearly
parallel lines instead of the x.
In it's memorandum the Court holds
chat ballots cast by persons who are not
egal voters and ballots which are illegal
Or fraudulent because disclosed or marked
|or Identification should not be counted
n the total as votes, or ballots cast, or
or any purpose, and therefore excluded |
hem. If the Court had held otherwise,
The "drys' would not have had q
majority Of the total ballots cast. The
Court included the blank and mismarked
ballots in the total Of ballots cast but
ays that in this case it would not change
he result, whether they were counted