# Page v. Allen

> Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · July 2, 1868 · 58 Pa. 338

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6233268

## Case

- **Full name:** Page versus Allen Robb versus Barlow
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
- **Decided:** July 2, 1868
- **Citations:** 58 Pa. 338
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Read
- **Judges:** Agnew, Read, Sharswood, Strong, Thompson
- **Cited by:** 39 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6233268

## Opinion text

Read, J.,
dissenting. — A majority of the court think that a registry law, properly framed, is constitutional, and well calculated to prevent frauds at election. I agree with my brother Agnew, that the Registry Act is constitutional, and could be carried into effective operation.
I was counsel of Mr. Kneass in 1851, and of Mr. Mann in 1856, and from what I saw in those contested election cases, I was fully convinced that the election laws were utterly inefficient in preventing fraud, and subsequent experience has confirmed me in my opinion. In some districts of the city — “ plague spots”— fraudulent voting is the rule, and honest voting the exception.
I am fully convinced that nothing but a registry law, honestly and firmly administered, can cure an evil which strikes at the root of our republican institutions.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6233268. Public record. Not legal advice.