1892. ] OF THE SENATE. 599

law if possible; if not, with the best means at hand,

which will secure that result without fraud or injury

either to the candidate or the voter. The danger lies
not so much in an immaterial departure from the strict
terms of the law as to the method of procedure, which
would not affect the great ends of the law, but rather
in establishing a precedent, by which designing,

obstinate, ignorant or dishonest men can thwart the

first purpose of all election laws, namely: the ascer-
tainment of the free and unbiased choice of the voter.

The Judges should always, and should in this case
have exhausted all the discretion, that a due regard to
the ends to be obtained would permit, and leave their
judgment to the final adjudication of the Courts and
Legislature.

Their refusal to hold an election in this case was
not based upon any reason that goes to the merits of
the law or its principal objects, but upon a dry
technicality that the ballots, although confessedly an
official ballot of the First District, was not designed
for the Second Precinct.

Refusing to attend as they did, failing to perform
their plain duty, it was perfectly competent for the
Republican Judge to prevent the defeat of an election,
by appointing and qualifying other officers as pro-
vided in section 45.

But the committee says "it will not do to say that

these officers, thus illegally selected and qualified did

their duty and no fraud resulted; the answer to this

is that their appointment and qualification were in

direct opposition to the provisions of the law, and
that the precautions which the Legislature has pre-
scribed to ensure secrecy and fairness were violated. "

I have shown that these officers were legally ap-
pointed and qualified under the law. Suppose they were
not and yet as de facto officers they main rained
all the precautions, and preserved all the securities of
the law against fraud and in favor of fairness and
secrecy, would the fact that their appointment was
not entirely regular vitiate a fair election—a fair op-
portunity to vote. It hardly seems so.

The candidate is not injured. The right to vote, at
the proper time and place, and with all the safeguards

of the law, is secured, and thus the full purpose of