OCR Text |
Show IS THE ELECTION OVER? From the standpoint of regular procedure the answer an-swer to the caption, of this editorial would be "yes." However there is now, as is always theh case when a candidate is elected by a close margin, fear upon the part of the supporters of the defeated , man. that' some, irregularities have been projected into the counting of the ballots so' a re-count ' is suggested: In our recollection, where a re-count has been made the original winner is declared elected with an even greater margin than before. ' Perhaps the reason for the re-count request being made at this time is because of the many "scratched" ballots. There are arguments going on between those interested as to the proper way of "scratching" the ballot. Some contend that it is not necessary to draw a line through the name of the man not wanted after a cross in the circle under the emplem has been made and a cross made in the square opposite the man on the other ticket for whom the voter desires to vote; while others contend that it is necessary to draw the line through the name. These conflicting contentions are held by many of the judges of election so it., is reasonable to believe that such "scratching" was counted one way by some sets of judges while other judges have counted them just the opposite. !J To make clear the proper way to count we . are ' printing below the law as is contained in the vol-umns vol-umns of the Utah Code Annotated 1943. Title 25, Chapter 6, Article 20: "HOW TO MARK THE TICKET. Any voter desiring to vote for all the candidates upon any ticket may mark in the circle above' that ticket, or in the squares opposite the names of all candidates thereon, or both such ' markings. If the voter does not desire to vote for a candidate, on a ticket under the circle of which he . has marked, he may draw a line through the name of such candidate, and the cross in the circle shall count as a vote for all the other candidates candi-dates on the ticket. , To vote for candidates on two or more tickets, he may mark in the squares opposite the names of such candidates without marking in any circle; or he may indicate his choice by marking in the circle above one ticket, drawing a line through the names of such candidates on that ticket for whom he does not desire to vote, and marking in the squares opposite the names of the candidates can-didates of his choice upon other tickets. The voter may also insert in -writing in the proper place in the bank ticket the name of any person for whom he desires to vote, and he shall be deemed to have voted for that person whether he makes or fails to make a cross mark opposite such name. The unnecessary marking of a cross in a square on the ticket below the marked circle shall not affect the validity of the vote. In case of a question submitted to the vote of the people, the voter shall mark a cross against the answer he desires to give. Title 25, Chapter 6, Article 21 : BALLOTS, HOW COUNTED. REJECTION- Ballots thus marked shall be counted for the candidates designated by the marks in the squares, and for the candidates upon the ticket beneath a marked circle excluding the candidates through whose names the voter may have drawn a line. When a circle is marked and no lines are drawn through the name of any candidate thereunder, the ballot shall be counted for all the names upon the ticket beneath such circle. When more than one circle is marked, the ballot shall be rejected. When only one officer for any office is to be elected, if the voter marks in squares opposite the name of more than one candidate therefor; or if, having marked the circle on one ticket, he shall mark the name of a candidate on another ticket without drawing a line through the name of the corresponding candidate upon the ticket beneath the marked circle, such vote shall not be counted for such office." If the above rules were followed in every instance in-stance it is without a doubt Governor Maw would have received a much larger majority because ' we are of the opinion that many votes were counted for J. Bracken Lee when they should not have been allowed. |