Grand Forks herald. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1916-1955, 1921-11-21
PETITIONS,

. The issue of the recall election cannot be re-
: opened now without a violation of the very manifest
Z intent of the law. In recognition of the fact that
I fraud might be committed and that errors were
quite likely to occur in the handling Of petitions
{ containing many thousands of names, provision was
made for a sufficient interim following the filing of
petitions during which time the petitions might be
inspected, the signatures verified, frauds detected
and error corrected. h etime was made ample for
this purpose, and its expiration was set sufficiently
in advance of the election date to remove all doubt
as to- the holding of an election within a reasonable
time. The purpose is obvious. The holding of a
recall election depends on the adequacy of the pc
titions. If there is no petition there can be no cleo
ton, and if the petitions are not in compliance with
the law there can be none. 1t is the duty of the
, secretary of state in state elections, and of the prop
er official in local recall elections, to examine the pc
titions presented, pass on their regularity, give no.
tice of errors if any are found, and, if the petitions
are found regular, or arc made regular within the
time prescribed, to proceed with arrang ements for
the right to protest against the holding of an cleo
ton if the petitions are insufficiently or improperly
signed. If no protest is filed within that time that
phase Of the subject is closed. It is very plainly
intended, not that elections shall be held in response
to invalid petitions, and that the results shall then
he rejected, but that invalid elections shall be pre-
vented, and for that purpose ample time is given to
determine the regularity of the petitions.
While this provision of the law is excellent, the
recall election law shares the defect common to all
0NS ~s"S >A@SAA6 " ~NA~ oSAA~ vi IN lIldl
it contains no provision for the inspection and veri-
fcation of signatures at the place of their origin.
When the petition relates to a statewide election, as
in the case Of a state recall initiated or referred
laws, etc, the petition, with its signatures from ev-
cry section of the state, is sent to Bismarck, and
there only can an inspection be made. At the Bis
rnarck office any person sufficiently interested can
discover Implications, if there are any. But only in
rare cases can a single individual be able to tell
whether or not the signatures are those of real vot-
ers. That can be determined only by comparing
the signatures with the voters lists from the sew
eral counties, and to get these lists copied and for
warded, and to make the necessary comparison is a
work requiring considerable organization and ex-
pense.
This situation could be remedied in any one Of
several ways. Any plan should provide for the GER
tlhcation of the names by precinct or county Off
Gals as those of properly qualified voters. A work
able plan might run something like this:
Let petitions be circulated by voting precincts,
all the signatures on a single petition being from the
same precinct. Let the petitions then be filed with
the township clerks and city auditors, due notice
being given of that fact, with time for public inspec-
ton. Let the clerks and auditors then compare the
signatures with the voters lists, eliminating dupli-
the petitions then be forwarded to the county audi
tor with the affidavit of the local official that all the
persons signing are qualified voters. Let the coun-
ty auditor, after seeing that all the returns are in
proper form, forward the lists to the capital with his
certificate. A brief time could then be given for
further examination and protest. In this way all
petitions would be examined where the sieners are
known, and where the lists of voters are kept. They
would start out free from error, or as nearly SO as is
possible, and everything right from the beginning
would be a matter Of publicity and official record.