Kelly v. Adams

• Decision Date: 18 December 1899
• Citation: 55 N.E. 837,183 Ill. 193
• Parties: KELLY v. ADAMS.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

183 Ill. 193

55 N.E. 837

KELLY

v.ADAMS.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Dec. 18, 1899.

Appeal from Effingham countycourt.

Election contest by W. S. Adams against W. R. Kelly.From a judgment in favor of the contestant, the contestee appeals.Reversed.

Wood Bros. for appellant.

R. C. Harrah, Wm. B. Wright, and Chas. Kelley, for appellee.

PHILLIPS, J.

At an election held April 4, 1899, appellant and appellee were rival candidates for supervisor in the town in which they lived.Each was nominated by his political party.The election was opened, closed, and proclamation made according to law.Each candidate was declared to have received 95 votes.Under the direction of the town clerk, lots were cast, and appellant was declared selected.One hundred and ninety-three votes were cast at the election.Two electors appeared to have made no attempt to vote for supervisor.One ballot, by the unanimous vote of the judges, was rejected.It was not indorsed on the back by the initials of either judge of the election.A copy of it is as follows:

Image 1 (2.56" X 3.89") Available for Offline Print

A petition for contest of election was filed in the county court of Effingham county, where it was held that this ballot should be counted for the appellee, from which this appeal is prosecuted.

A statement made by appellee obviates anything further as to the facts: ‘Under the pleadings in this case, and according to the evidence submitted to the trial court, no question was raised concerning the election, and the conduct of the judges of said election, except the rejection of the disputed ballot by the judges of said election from the count.The only question submitted to the trial court was, did the judges of said election erroneously reject said ballot from the count, and should it have been counted for appellee?’

By section 26 of the Australian ballot low of 1891 it is provided: ‘If the voter marks more names than there are persons to be elected to an office, or if for any reason it is impossible to determine the voter's choice for any office to be filled, his ballot shall not be counted for such office.No ballot without the official endorsement shall be allowed to be deposited in the ballot-box, and none but ballots provided in accordance with the provisions of this act shall be counted.’The evidence shows that this ballot had no indorsement to show that it was an official ballot provided in accordance with the low.To ignore this provision of the statute, and allow ballots to be counted which do not contain the official indorsement, would authorize the voting of ballots that might have been surreptitously obtained or copied, and one of the purposes of the ballot low...