The Telegraph-courier. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1888-1946, 1923-06-07

presented differently, or perhaps more
there would be no end
to controversies. Innumerable election
contests have turned and been decided
upon the legality or illegality of votes
in certain specified districts. Had
other election districts, or all of the
election districts in the county, been
brought into the case by the parties,
the court would have investigated and
considered the situation as thus
presented.
Question of Registration.
Registration is required in the city
election districts only and not in the
country The illegality of the votes
thrown out and considered in arriving
at the result was determined solely
upon the two points of non-registra-
ton and failure to swear in the votes
of electors not registered.
It is the settled law in this state
that an elector possessing all the
qualifications prescribed by law and
having the right to vote may exer-
else that right only:
CD If his name is on the registry.
(2) If his name( is not on the
registry, by accompanying his
ballot with an affidavit in the
\ form prescribed by law.
co BY making and offering for
deposit a ballot identified by
endorsement of the names or
initials of the ballot clerks,
and not otherwise.
The statute prescribing the manner
of proof by a non-registered elector
of his right to vote, is imperative; and
the vote Of such an elector who failed
to comply with the statute should not.
be counted, although it was received
by the inspectors. State ex rel
ONeill VS.. Trask, 1876 Wis. 333.
No Discretion With Courts.
Neither election officials nor courts
have any discretion in the matter.
Electors who have lost their votes
have lost them because of their failure
to comply with the law. If, failing
in these requirements, the voter be
'disfranchised,' he is by his own omis-
sion a voluntary party to his dis
REIMBURSEMENT. State ex rel Wood VS..
Baker, 38 Wis. II, IS. If electors
fail to comply with the law and are
thus 'disfranchised' it is their own
fault. The result is not chargeable
to the court. If the elector is not
registered he may vote upon proper
affidavit. If not registered he has
ample opportunity to have his name
placed upon the registry. If this is
not done then, even at the last mo-
ment when he presents his ballot, it
is his constitutional right to have it
received if accompanied by the re-
quired affidavit and not otherwise.
That is the law.
For ELECTION Districts
Counsel urge that after determining
the number of illegal votes in the
questioned districts the proportion to
be deducted from the vote of each
candidate should have been cast upon
the vote Of each candidate in the whole
county and not confined to the two
specified election districts. The sta
tutes all through speak of election
DISTRICTS The statute under which
this action is brought requires that
the complaint shall state the 'elec-
ton district where such illegal votes
were cast.
A district is division of terri
tory, a defined portion of a state,
county, town or city, made for admin
istration, electoral or other purposes,
Webster's Dict. The Office in question
is county ofice. The county is the
territory divided into election dis
tricts or precincts. The two districts
questioned, the sixth and eighth wards,
were the only election districts brought
into the case. The defendant brought
nothing into court but denial of the
complaint and that the relator was
estopped from proceeding in quo war
ranto because of his participation in
the recount and appeal proceedings
The court overruled both these con-
tentions. The complaint made no af-
frmative issues and the defendant
produced no evidence. 1t was his
privilege to present his case in manner
and form as he and his counsel
thought advisable. The action was
commenced February 8, 1928. The de-
PENDANT had two capable counsel be-
sides himself and ample time within
which to investigate and prepare his
case. If it has not been adequately
presented, then, like the 'disfranchis-
ed voter he can blame no one else.
No Big Discrepancies Elsewhere.
Whites light discrepancies developed
in other districts than the sixth and
eighth wards, they were insignificant
and insufficient to change the result
as determined by the questioned dis
tricts in reaching the conclusion an
ncunced. 1t is true that the result
turned upon conditions in the sixth
and eighth wards, but it should be
borne in mind that after the result
was determined. in those election dis
tricts the vote of the balance of the
county, the other fifteen election dis
tricts, were added to that result as
found and determined by the referee,
whose determinations were stipulated
in the case by the parties as verities.
Not vote was changed or rejected
in any precinct other than those put
in issue by the parties. Not a voter