Case Name: STATE ex AUTOMATIC REGISTERING MACHINE CO v. GREEN, Director of Finance etc.
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1929-06-19
Citations: 7 Ohio Law Abs. 381
Docket Number: No 21676
Parties: STATE ex AUTOMATIC REGISTERING MACHINE CO v GREEN, Director of Finance etc.
Judges: Marshall, CJ, Kinkade, Matthias and Day, JJ, concur. Robinson and Jones, JJ, concur in proposition 2 of the syllabus and in .the judgment.
Reporter: The Ohio Law Abstract
Volume: 7
Pages: 381–381

Head Matter:
STATE ex AUTOMATIC REGISTERING MACHINE CO v GREEN, Director of Finance etc.
Ohio Supreme Court
No 21676.
Decided June 19, 1929

Opinion:
Syllabus by
ALLEN, J.
ELECTIONS
(240 V2) A constitutional requirement that all elections be by ballot does not invalidate an otherwise legal enactment providing for the use of voting machines in elections. The term "ballot" designates a method of conducting elections which will insure secrecy, as distinguished., from open or viva-voce voting. (State, ex rel. Karlinger, v. Board of Deputy State Supervisors of Elections, 80 Ohio St., 471, overruled).
MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONS
(360 C2) A charter city is not authorized, under Section 3 of Article XVIII of the Ohio Constitution to prescribe a method of conducting state and county elections.
Marshall, CJ, Kinkade, Matthias and Day, JJ, concur. Robinson and Jones, JJ, concur in proposition 2 of the syllabus and in .the judgment.