The plaintiffs seek to enjoin the levy of the special tax for school purposes principally upon two grounds, viz.: 1. That no plаce was named as the polling place in the order calling the election.
2.
That the registration books were not kept оpen for the number of days required by law.' As bearing upon the two questions, his Honor finds that the election was held at Indian Trail, where the schоolhouse is located and where all elections are held for that township and district; that the place where the eleсtion was held was known to all the voters and accepted by them, and that they knew this election would be held there; that the omission tо name the particular place for holding this election was not discovered by anyone until after this action was brought and 'after complaint was filed, so well understood was the place where the election would be held; “that the time and place fоr holding said election was well and generally understood and known by all in the district”; “that every qualified voter in said district had a fair and amplе opportunity to register and vote in said election if he had so desired”; that- the registration books were opened on May 3d by the regularly appointed and sworn registrar, and the books were kept open until and
*586
including May 22d, except on parts of tbe two days, May 20th. and 21st. It appears that during the parts of these two days when the registrar was absent from his home no person applied for registration. Section 4115, Revisal, requires that “the election shall be held in the district, under the law governing general elections, as near аs may be:” Section 4323 prescribes that it “shall be his (the registrar’s) duty, between the hours of nine o’clock A. M. and sunset on each day (Sunday exсepted), for twenty days preceding the day for closing the registration books, to keep open said books for the registration of any electors residing within such township, ward or precinct and entitled to registration.” Disregarding the qualifying phrase, “as near as may bе,” in section 4115, Revisal, it was not in the contemplation of section 4323 that the registrar of election should be present at his home оr the place of registration every moment of the twenty days, from nine A. M. to sunset. A reasonable compliance is all that the law would require — such presence as would enable every citizen qualified to register to have his name placed upon the rеgistration books. A full opportunity to register is the utmost that the statute contemplates, and this his Honor finds as a fact was afforded, “that еvery qualified voter in said district had a fair and
ample
opportunity to register.” What more could any voter have required? Was not such an oрportunity, at least, “as near as may be,” the strict and literal requirement of the words of the statute ? All that any voter may require is a “full and аmple opportunity” to complete his qualifications by registration as an elector. While we would not approve any substаntial departure from the statutory period for registration for a general or special election, we would not feel justified in declaring void an election when the facts disclosed that no citizen qualified to vote was denied the opportunity to registеr. The purpose of every election is to ascertain the will of every citizen qualified to participate therein, and whеn “full and ample opportunity” is given him we do not conceive what more can be added. Upon the facts found by his Honor, which the еvidence sustains, we conclude that there was no error committed by him in his ruling on this question. The decisions of this Court in the following cases support this conclusion.
DeBerry v. Nicholson,
Affirmed.