SIZE OF ELECTION PRECINCTS.
Mr. Hostetter's bill [S. 84--see page 51] to amend Section 8 of the act defining duties of officers in relation to elections being read the third time--
Mr. HOSTETTER said the town he hailed from polls about 300 votes and has more than one voting precinct. The object of the bill is to make but one voting place in smaller towns. Talk about fraud; we don't know anything about it up North. We always have voted at one precinct until the last year, and without any fraud in the election.
Mr. BUNDY favored the passage of the bill. A large number of small towns are divided, some into as many as five wards. The existing law provides that the Judges and Inspectors are to be freeholders, and in some places in his County it was difficult to find freeholders enough to hold the election. The present law has given a great deal of dissatisfaction. In a town of 500 or 600 inhabitants all should vote at one precinct, thus saving the trouble of holding elections in small precincts where there may be only twenty voters. The present law is a nuisance.
Mr. SPANN regarded the bill as a good one, but believed its main feature is embraced in a proviso in the present law which leaves it discretionary with town trustees to construe it as public convenience may demand. It is purely a ques- page: 253[View Page 253] tion of construction. If it is not optionary, then this bill in necessary.
Mr. GARRIGUS did not believe the law should be left so uncertain in its terms. The statutes should be plain. We boast about the superiority of our Public Schools, and yet send men to the Legislature who pass laws that have to be construed by appeals to the Courts or the Attorney General. There is a public demand for the repeal of this section, and he favored the passage of the bill as in the interest of justice and fair dealing.
Mr. GRAHAM thought this bill ought to pass. No one can justify the expense of holding four or five elections in a precinct where one is ample.
Mr. HEFRON preferred to see the law stand as it is on the Statute Book. Its purpose was a good one, and there were good reasons for such an enactment. If small towns desire several voting precincts they should be permitted to have them. The present law is in the interest of minority representation--to let each part of a town stand on its own footing and elect their own Representative in the Board of Town Trustees.
Mr. WOOLLEN also should vote against this bill--refusing to support any measure requiring towns to have but one voting Precinct. The dominant party under this bill would have all the officers, whereas, if the Precincts were small, there would be a division of polical sentiment.
Mr. VOYLES thought the bill right. He saw no strength in arguments against this measure.
Mr. KRAMER favored the bill. All the voters of the town should vote for its officers.
Mr. BROWN moved to recommit the bill with instructions to amend it so as to leave it in the discretion of town officers, whether the town shall have one or more voting Precincts, regardless as to the number of population.
Mr. VOYLES opposed the motion. This matter should not be left discretonary with town authorities. They may not act at all times as they should, and it is better to have it specifically stated in the law that there should be but one voting Precinct.
Mr. SPANN objected to the instructions. One year a Board may establish but one voting precinct, and the very next Board may turn round, on account of some political matter, and establish voting precincts in different districts, so there will be no uniformity in this matter. Say they must have a voting precinct in every Ward, or say they must have but one.
Mr. URMSTON favored the motion to recommit with these and other instructions. He did not consider the item of expense in this connection worth mentioning.
The motion to recommit with instructions was rejected by yeas, 15; nays, 28.
Mr. BROWN said the present law has been generally construed that the Boards have the discretion to fix the number of voting precincts, and believed that to be the intention of the framers of the law. Under this bill the majority can stifle and smother the rights and privileges of minorities in all towns not exceeding three thousand inhabitants. He hoped that the bill would not pass.
Mr. GRUBBS hoped the bill would pass. While acknowledging the construction of the existing law to be as stated, he thought the question ought to be definitely settled by statute. He did not believe in having voting precincts in every small Ward, because the interest of those small towns are substantially one. Besides that, the correct construction of the law he believed to be that every Precinct vote for all the Trustees of the town, no matter how many voting Precincts there may be.
Mr. FOSTER believed the present law good enough and saw no necessity for the bill. He should therefore vote against it.
The bill was passed by yeas, 32; nays, 10.
