Court Opinion

ID: 9733425
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 17:07:24.618111+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:26:41.417205
License: Public Domain

Concurring Opinion by
Mr. Justice Eagen:
Since the election involved occurred prior to the effective date of the Act of August 13, 1963, P. L. 707, No. 379, 25 P.S. §3146.8 (Supp. 1963), the scope of our review on this appeal is very narrow and limited. *160We may not inquire into the validity of the ballots involved. Legally, therefore, the result reached in the majority opinion is correct and inescapable.
Albeit, the case presents implications which should not go unnoticed. Serious irregularities in the casting of a large number of absentee ballots are clearly evident which give strong indication that this election may well have been stolen. It is a matter which demands the earnest attention of the law enforcement agencies in order that it shall not happen again and the will of the electorate thwarted by unscrupulous individuals charged with the responsibility of supervising the election machinery.
To me, dishonest and fraudulent election practices smell just as noxious whether they emanate from one area or another.