Page images
PDF
EPUB

PROHIBITION OF USE OF NAME. The members of the Statuatory Revision Commission also put in a more decisive form in the Election Code the caveat clause; the provision enabling party candidates to prohibit the printing of their names upon the ballots as independent candidates. That clause read as follows in the amended Ballot Act of 1891 :

"The name of a person nominated under the provisions of section 3 (in relation to party nominations) of this act shall not be placed upon a ticket put in nomination by certificate as prescribed by section 5 (in relation to independent nominations) of this act, when such person shall have given notice at least fifteen days before election to the officers with whom his original certificate of nomination was filed by a writing signed and duly acknowledged that he does not wish his name placed upon such ticket. There shall also be as many different kinds of ballots as may be required to comply with the directions hereinbefore authorized of the person or persons designated and appointed as provided in section 5 of this act upon certificates of nomination, but the person or persons so designated and appointed shall not require the name of any candidate nominated in such a certificate to be printed upon more than one kind of ballot.

Messrs. Collin, Magone and Linson made this amendment read as follows:

"The name of a person having a party nomination shall not be placed upon an official ballot of independent nomination, if such person shall have given notice at least fifteen days before the election for which the ballot is prepared, to the officer with whom his party certificate of nomination is filed, by a writing signed and acknowledged by him, that he does not wish his name placed upon any ballot of independent nomination, or upon such particular ballot of independent nomination."

PERIOD OF INDEPENDENT NOMINATIONS CHANGED. Messrs. Collin, Magons and Linson furthermore in their election code have lengthened the period between election day and the final day when such nominations can be made

under the original Ballot Reform Act of 1890 and the amended Ballot Reform Act of 1891 an independent nomination for a State office could be filed with the Secretary of State up to a day within fifteen days of election day. The new Election Code provides that no independent nomination for a State office can be filed later than a day within twenty days of election day. Formerly it will also be observed independents had ten days after a party nomination was made for a State office, if it was delayed to the last possible moment, to make their nominations for the same office. Under the amendment just made this period is shortened up to five days.

The same principle of increasing the period between election day and the final day when independent certificates can be filed is pursued in the Election Code regarding the lesser offices. Thus under the Ballot Reform Act of 1890 and the amended Ballot Reform Act of 1891 an independent nomination for a county office could be filed with a county clerk, or if New York, with the board of police commissioners, or if in Brooklyn, with the board of elections, up to a period within twelve days before election. Under the Election Code this period is lengthened by three days; no independent nomination papers can be filed in a less period than fifteen days. The interval here between the final filing of party nomination papers, and the final filing of independent nomination papers, is five days. It was eight days.

NOMINATIONS IN MINOR CITIES. Provision is made in the Election Code, as it was not in either the Ballot Reform Act of 1890, or the Amended Ballot Reform Act of 1891, for the filing of nomination papers in the minor cities of the State. The period before election day when the final papers can be filed, is somewhat less than in New York and Brooklyn. Thus the Election Code declares that those certificates "required to be filed with the city clerk of any other city (than Brook. lyn and New York"), if party nominations must be filed “at least ten and not more than twenty days; if independent nominations, at least eight and not more than twenty days." In comparison with New York and Brooklyn, in which the latest day for filing party nominations is twenty days before election day, this is a reduction of ten days, so far as the lesser cities of the State are concernedparty nominations in the minor cities can be made ten days nearer election day. It will be perceived, also, that certificates of independent nominations can be filed in the minor cities of the State up to within eight days of election; and that there is an interval of only two days between the final day upon which a party nomination and an independent nomination in these minor cities.

Town NOMINATIONS. Another new feature respecting nomination certificates is a division of the periods for the filing of party and of independent certificates in towns and villages. The amended Ballot Reform Act of 1891 merely said that “nominations for town and village offices shall be made and certified substantially as herein before provided, but the certificates thereof shall be filed with the clerk not less than five days before the day of election." The new Election Code declares that those certificates "required to be filed with a town or village clerk, if party nominations, shall be filed at least six and not more than twenty days before election day,” and “if independent nominations, at least five and not more than twenty days” before election day.

OBJECTIONS TO MARKED BALLOTS. The new Election Code also modifies the amended Ballot Reform Act of 1891 in respect to ballots presumably marked for identification. The act of 1891 declared that legal notice should be taken of any ballot or paster ballot written upon or marked in any way “with the intent that the same may be identified." The new Election Code declares that legal notice should be taken of any ballot or paster ballot written upon or marked in any way “for the purpose of ing directions to the inspectors of election respecting marked ballots :

“When an inspector of election or other election officer or duly authorized watcher shall, during a canvass of the votes, or immediately after the completion thereof, declare his belief that any particular ballot, paster, or paster ballot affixed thereto, has been written upon or marked in any way for the purpose of ideotification, the inspectors or canvassers shall write on the back of such ballot the words 'objected to because marked for identification,' or words in substance to that effect, and sign their names thereto, and attach each such ballot to their written statement of the result of the canvass. Each such ballot shall be counted by them the same as if not so objected to.”

Careful provision is also made for the recording of the number of ballots suspected to have been marked for the purpose of identification. Section 115 of the Election Code makes the following declaration:

"§ 115. Certified statement of canvass.-Upon the completion of the canvass, the inspectors, except in the cities of New York and Brooklyn, shall make and sign & written statement thereof, showing the date of the election, the number of the district, the town or ward and the county in which it was held, the whole number of ballots received for each office, the whole number cast for each person for such office, and the whole number of ballots objected to because marked for identification, written out at length in words, and at the end thereof a certificate signed by the inspectors to the effect that the statement is in all respects correct.'

Regarding the official ballots and the preservation of a sample of each one, the Election Code further says to the election inspectors:

“Such inspectors shall securely attach to such statement one official ballot of each kind voted for all the officers to be chosen at such election. They shall state in words, at full length and written partly on such ballot and partly on the paper to which it shall be attached, the whole number of the ballots which were received, having the same names for the same offices as the one attached. If two or more ballots cast, varying from every official ballot, shall have thereon the names of the same candidates for thu same offices throughout, only one of such ballots shall be annexed to such statement and there shall be written partly upon it and partly upon the paper to which it is attached, a statement of the number of such ballots cast. The ballots so attached with such statements so written shall be deemed a part of the certified statement of the canvass by the inspectors. All other ballots cast at such election not containing the names of the same candidates for the same offices as appear upon any other ballot so cast shall be securely attached to such statsment. Unless such election be an election of town, city, village or school officers held at a different time from a general election, such inspectors shall forthwith and before adjourning make two certified copies of such certified statement of the result of the canvass.'

THE EXCLUSION OF MARKED BALLOTS. The amended Ballot Reform Act of 1891 provided for a review by the courts of the action of boards of inspectors in counting alleged marked ballots. It made the following declaration respecting the matter:

“Such ballots shall be counted in estimating the result of an election; but within thirty days after the filing of the certificate declaring such result a writ of mandamus may issue out of the Supreme Court against the Board of Canvassers or officers acting as such board, by whom the ballots were counted upon the application of any candidate voted for at the election to require a recount of the votes, and all questions relating to the validity of such ballots, and as to whether they were properly counted shall be determined in such proceeding. All such ballots shall be preserved for at least one year, and until the questions raised by such writ shall be finally determined. Election boards and boards of canvassers shall be continued in existence for the

purposes of such proceedings.”

Messrs. Collin, Magone and Linson have rewritten this provision in the following form in their Election Code:

$ 118. Judicial investigation of ballots objected to as

« PreviousContinue »