Blackmer v. Hildreth

• Decision Date: 01 March 1902
• Parties: BLACKMER v. HILDRETH et al.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

181 Mass. 29

63 N.E. 14

BLACKMER v. HILDRETH et al.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk.

March 1, 1902

COUNSEL

J. W. Corcoran, Wm. B. Sullivan, and S. P. Smith for petitioner.

J. B Warner and Arthur H. Brooks, for respondents.

OPINION

HAMMOND, J.

St 1898, c. 548, requires that a nomination paper, in the case of an election like this, shall be filed as early as the seventh day preceding the election (section 145), and that at the time it is filed it shall have thereon the certificate of the registrars of voters as to the number of signatures which are names of qualified voters, and also shall have annexed to it an oath, made by one of the signers thereto, verifying the truth of the statements therein contained, with the certificate of the person before whom the oath is taken that he is satisfied that the person to whom the oath is administered is the person signing the paper. Sections 141, 142. In the case before us the nomination paper was filed two days late, and a certificate of the registrars was placed thereon, and the oath of one of the signers of the paper and he certificate respecting it were annexed thereto after the paper was filed, but not before the official ballot was made up. One of the questions is whether the election shall be declared invalid on account of these irregularities. The court found as a fact that all parties, including the town clerk and the registrars, one of whom was the petitioner, acted without fraud and in good faith. Dexter's name was placed upon the official ballot, and he received at the election a majority of the votes.

Under our system of elections, the voter receives at the polls from the election officers an official ballot, of which he does not know, and is not expected to know, anything, except what appears upon its face; and as a rule it is impossible, as in this case, by an inspection of the ballot, to ascertain whether or not there has been any irregularity in the preparation of it. He takes this ballot, sees upon it the names of the candidates, and, having expressed thereon in due from his choice, deposits it in the ballot box. Thus he duly expresses his will upon the paper prepared and handed to him by the officers of the law appointed for that purpose. All this he does in good faith. All this the voters at the election in question did in good faith, and the result was that Dexter received a clear majority of the votes.

It is contended, however, by the petitioner, that the provisions of the election law above recited are mandatory, and that as a necessary result the election of Dexter was void. On the contrary, the respondent contends that in this case there was no such noncompliance with these provisions as to render the election void. The statute in question deals with the whole subject of elections, from the qualifications of voters to the final ascertainment of their choice. In order that the official ballot may be properly prepared, it provides the manner in which caucus and other nomination papers shall be made up, prescribing with considerable minuteness the details; and it fixes the time within which the papers shall be presented for the ballot, as well as the time within which objections to any such paper may be made. Sections 139-146, 148-152. It further provides for the creation of a board charged with the duty of settling all disputed questions of fact arising upon such objections, and 'the decision of a majority of the members thereof shall be final.' Sections 147, 153. It further provides that nomination papers filed and in apparent conformity with law shall be held valid unless objections are seasonably made thereto. Section 146. In the case of towns, the town clerk, having before him the undisputed papers, and the decision of the proper tribunal upon those to which objection is made, prepares the offical ballot in accordance therewith, and this is the ballot which the voter finds waiting for him at the polls. It contains the officially declared result of all these preliminary proceedings, but, as we have said before, there is nothing by which the voter can judge whether or not all these proceedings have been regular. As stated by Andrews, C.J., in People v. Wood, 148 N.Y. 142, 147, 42 N.E. 536,...