OFFICE OFTHEAlTORNEY GENERALOFTEXAS AUSTIN

Bonorable E. L. Dunoan County Attonmy Nolan County Sweetwater, Toxae
Dear sir: 

# u

of nlto-innaiirt in De7llocretio 0hio namepriatoa ent oanaidate ?or a ballot r0r the

or 4th wherrln you wa6awrite-in 

### primarymy have r the g6noral aleetioa aa opendent, or **non-parthan** Civil Statutee, lQ28, prenaent 6anaiafh98 t0 hare oial ballot for general
omxal4atee for 0rfio0 at a ownsleotlon mayhave their on the official ballot onappli- ‘~ .county ~0ry or townorBan6 foml an4 rein preaorlbea for applicationa to be madeto the Yeoretery of State in oaae of State or diatrlot lndepandent nomination; **providad,** that a petition **0r** five par oent or the entire vote cast In euoh county, oity 

### or town at the last general eleotlon shall be required **ror** such nom2riatiOn.”Honorable 5. L. Duncan, Rage 2

Theabove quoted statute in -providing *auoh applfcation being in the 881~8form and subject to the samerequuirements heroin prescribed for applloationa to bo madato the Seoretflry 0r State in case of State or distrlot lndepenaent nomInatlcn* lncorporatss by reference the following clause contained in Article 3159, which reads:

”

. whohas **&d** and provided, alao, that no parron

at a primary eleotlon ahall sign an application in favor of anyone r0r an 0fri00 for which a nominctlon wasmadeat such primary electIoh.* In order to meet the roquleltea proaoribod bytho roregolng statute, It is noceasarp that ths Independent oandldate for sheriff present to the oounty judge a petition 8Igned by a aurflclent numberof qualified votera 0r tho oounty to equal floe per cent of the entlro vote oast in aald county at the last general eleation, and that all of such slgnatorlos have not voted in the last Demooratlo primary oleotlon.

Aaaumingthat the oandldata hae met thoao raqulraBlents, 

### wa come nowto a conelderatlon of the qua&Ion of whrther he 1s entltled to have his nameprInted on the ballot at the general 

### electionas an lndspendent oandldate, even though he partlolpated aa a candidate, and presumably also a6 avoter, in the Demooratio primary at which the Damooratlo nominee for the orfioe of shsrlfr was selaotsd.

Artiols 3110, Revised Civil Statutes, 19&S, provides for the party pledge to be printed onballots on primary ela~o**tion** and reads as follows:

“No 0rfi0iai ballot r0r primary eleatlon ehall have on It any symbol or devioe or any printed matter, except a unir0nfiprimary test, roadfng as follows: ‘I ama (inserting name**of** polltlcal party or organlmof which the voter ia a member) and pledge myself to support the nomlnae of this primary;’ and any ballot which ahall not contain such ,prInted test above the nameaof the candidates there**on,** shall be void and shall not be oountod.” TheSupremeCourt of Texan has re~peatedly held that the pledge *to support the nomlnso of this primary,* contained onthe primary ballot a8provided by Article 3110, supra, imposes merely a moral and not a legal obligation onthe Voter..
Eonorabla E. L. Dunoan, Face 3

8.0 

### Kayv. Sohnolder, 110Tex. 359, 2l6 8. W.479, E21S. w. 6601 westorman v. Mlms, 111 Tax. 29, 227 S. W. 1781 Lwa v. Wll~o~, 119Tax. 256 28 9. w, (2d) 515; Lovo v. Buokaor, 121 Tox. 369, 49 6. W. [24) 425.

In tho oasa of Westerman v. lcIm#, nuBa, tho supram0OouHi of Toxaa hadbefore it a question eimilar to the ona hors under oonsldaratlon. In that ca6e the roqui8Ito aumborof qua1Ifi.d 9Otorr of Oalraston Countf whohadnot participated in the Democratic primary, petit aaed‘tbt tho nameof aubroy Fuller be printed a8 an Indapandont oandldata for alstrlat judge on the general election ballot. AubmJ Nlor had partlolpated andvoted in the Demooratlo primaof that year, at which the Demooratio candldeto Par dirtriot judge was nomlmtsd. The cult waa an original 

### l pplioation to tho supreme Court for a writ o?numdamus to acmpel the Seoratary of State to issue his Inettructionr to tho County Clerk dlreotlng that the nameof Fuller be prlatod in tha Indepandont column of the OffIOIal ballot. ThaSupz%tm~.Court denied the mandamus. Theentire oourt oonourred. In the rorult, but Mr. Chief Justice Phillips based hlr daolelon on the ground thet the statute preroriblng tho party pl1dgo to support ths nominees of thet party Impo8ass legal dujrupon him. Said Judge Phllllpe, at pago 4E!l

"In virtue 

### ofthe statutes, the duty to,perform tha agraamant booam a legal duty; the right cf Judge Street (the Damooratlo nomlhoa 

### fordistrict judge) ar a benaflalarp of the duty beoame a legal right; and it would oommandthe law'8 protaotlon a8 any other lagal right.* Tho

### majorityof the oourt, however, a8 expraseed In the opinion by bfr. Juetloa Greenwooa,reoognlerd the rule laid aownin Kay v. Sohnalder, 110 Tex. 359, Z18 6. W.479, that tho pledge to mupportthe party oandidata lmpoaee marely a moral and not a legal obligation on %hevoter.

Xr. Juetlor Gremwood dsolared at page 38: *In our oplnlon a voter oannot take part in a primary or oonvention 0r a party, to name**party** nomlneor, wlthout assuming an obligation binding on the voter's honor and coaaclenoe. Suoh obligation inhere8 in the very nature 

### ofhis 

### eat,entirely re-Eonorabls x. t. Duos, Fags 4

gardlsss of any sxprsss~plsdgs, and sntlrsly rsgsrdless OSths requirsmants of any statute. The obligation, like the promlss sxaoted **by** the ststuts, whsntreated as governing future conduot, Is for oooperation in good faith to ssours ths suooess of the nOdMe. Thers Is no reasonably oertaln measure of bona fide cooperation in matters of this sort. The votsr's oonduot must bs detsrmlnsd largely by his ownpeouliar senso of propriety andof-right; Xt la 

### ror suohrsssonsthat the oourts do not undsrtsks to oompal psrrormsnoa o? the obligation. Bslng unsntoroeable through the oourts, the obligation Is a moral obligation.

. . . **“We**do not say that oiroumstanoes might not aria. under whloh ens wbohad p!irtloipatsd in a primary would **be** rsllered of ths 

### moralobligation which is ordinarily lnourrsd not to undertake the nomInso*s defeat. The present ease doss not call for ths dstsrminstion of the atfeot ot extraordinary 

### olroumstan0es.w Mr. Justlos Orssnwood’s opinion dmlsd the matidamu onthe grounds that the oandldate **having** vIolatO@ hlo party 

### pledgeby soeking to **bsoome** sn lndspsndent candidate at the general elsotlon did not OCIPS into a oourt of squlty with ~olsan handewand thsrofors his applloation for mandamuswas denied. Weoontlnue to quota from the 

### opinlonr

gearing concludqd that the petition of rela**tbrs** Is grounded on Conduot amounting to 811lnritation to, and hsnae partlolpation In an aot tlolatirs of **good** faith and OSoonsolonoe, It rollows that relators did not oomsinto oourt with aloan hands, a6 required to entitle thsm to.@s 

### reliefprayedfor, and hence the mandsmusIs 

### d@i'Isd." Under the opinion or the ms ?Jority or the oourt in Westermanv. Maims,the Demooratio no me has no lsgally snioroeable rlghts in the matter. Wor does ths manwhoseeks to have his nameplaoed on the ballot as an independent candldate. In neither case will amandamusor sn lnjumtion aotion lie either to place the aandidate*s nameon the tlakst or prevent its being plaoed thsreon.

Under ths authority of Weatanuanv. YIms, thsrsfors, weara oompellsd to advise you that whether ths'name of Inds-

### 484

*. ~~ gonoreble :. L. Dunoan, J?eage 5

p8ndc:ntcandid,?t& for sheriff ehculti b? placed on the general election bnllot under these ciraumetanccs, Ii: a quectlon to ; be determined by the County Judge. Xle **d&oisiOn** In the matI ter, In the obsenoe of the exceptional circuzetances referred to byEr. Justice Greenwoo:: in the last above ?uotatIon, will net be disturbed by the OourtL. Henay base hiu deoislon upon Ed detx-mlnatlon of the question of whether cIrcu:ietenoes exist (in the vior6s of M.r.Justice Grsenwoti ) Wn$er which one who had particlpetsd in a primary would be relieved of the morel obli@tIon which 

### leordlnsrily Incurred not to undertake the 

### noml.nse*s

6efaat.” ii&plying spe~lficnlly to your questlon, weare of the opj.nIon the.t it rests within the dl,so:&tIon of the oounty judge whether hewill accept the application for the nameof an Independent oandidate for sherlf f to be printed onthe ballot for the general eleotion, where such candidate partiolpeted 8s a voter or ckndldets in the preceding Drmooratlc primary k, eleotlon. Fewish to point out aRain that such applioatlon, in order to meet the requirements of ArtIolss 3159-3162, mu&tbe signed under oath by n sufficient numberof qualified voters of the county whodid. not partI,cipnte In the primary election 1, to equal 

### fiveperoent 

### ofthe votes cast In the oounty at the lest general elsotlon. YOWSVerytNly

%IFK :BBB By~&%?~h~

. Assietant