Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1915-01-14

would be proper and correct, but II
you read the Australian ballot act you
will be struck again and again not by
the divergence in the form OF the
statutes but by their similarity. the
original Maine Australian ballot law
is copied, as far as those sections are
concerned, absolutely from the Mas
sachusetts law. In the Massachusetts
House of Representatives they pre-
serve their election cases and use them
as precedence, and you will find in those
cases a line Of decisions holding that
such ballots shall be counted for the
man whose name is on the sticker.
on the grounds that the highest test
and the real test and the right test
Of an election is, who did the voter
intend to vote for; and they put the
question up to the encouragement o.
Massachusetts, Attorney General Pills
bury, of whom every lawyer here has
heard time and again, one of the rec
ognized leaders of the New England
Bar, and this was put up to him:
"Question--At a special election for
representatives to the General Court,
where the official ballot bears only one
| name. and the printed name of another
candidate is pasted, not in the space
at the end Of the list Of candidates.
but in the space where the name of
the regularly nominated candidate IS
printed on the official ballot, but not
covering such name, and the X mark
is placed in the space to the right Of
both names, can such ballots be count
ed for either candidate, and if so, for
which candidate?"
"Answer-At a special election for
representative to the General Court.
where the official ballot bears only one
name and the printed name Of an
other candidate is pasted, not in the
space at the end of the list Of cand-
dates, but in the space where the
name Of the regularly nominated can
didate IS printed on the official bal
lot, but not covering such name, and
the mark is placed in the space to
the right of both names, such ballots
can be counted for either candidate.
| according to the voters choice, if 1t
is possible to determine his choice;
and it is a settled rule Of election law
that the writing Or otherwise inserting
or affiEing a name to or upon bal
lot is competent evidence to show
that the voter intended to vote for the
| person whose name is SO inserted or
affixed
|. There is case which came before the
supreme court of Wisconsin,, in which
case the question before the court was:
Who did those parties intend to vote for?
If they intended to vote for one man, he
should be seated, and if the court was
satisfied as reasonable men that when a
man put a sticker below a printed name
he intended to vote for the man whose
name was on the sticker. That ques-
| ton, gentlemen, do not think we need
to argue here because every one Of you
know, If you stock to think Of it, Demo-
crat, Republican or Progressive, that
when man puts sticker on a ballot
in the space where the Office for which
that man is a candidate comes he in
! tends to vote for the man whose name
| Is on the sticker. You may say he in
! tended to vote for two men, but, GENTLE
| men, there is not town east of Bangor
where there are two candidates for rep
resentative to the Legislature. However.
I will say that I speak subject to cor
rection, but do not think of any; every
body knows in those small places the
contest Is between this man and that
man, and they know absolutely and posir
lively that they cannot vote for both
men. and they never intended to vote for
both Of those men when tney put their
sticker on that ballot.
Continued on Page 1o-coIumD n