Lexington weekly intelligencer. (Lexington, Mo.) 1871-1887, 1879-06-21
1.-THE TUCKER PLAN"
Opinion of the Supreme Court.

We give below such extracts from the opinion
of the supreme court of the state as go to the
merits OF the above cause. 1t will be understood
that the suit was not brought to GUST Judge Col
lier, who was elected probate judge at the last
election, in Galloway county, on what is COM
monty known as the Tucker plan,' - or propos-
ing to run for an ofice for less remuneration
than the sum fixed by law, but merely to test the
legality of an election obtained by such means
under existing laws.
State of Missouri at the relation of J.)
L. Smith, attorney general,
against
Samuel B. Collier, respondent.
Every one will concede that it Is of the highest
Importance that popular elections should be con.
Quoted IN such u way as to exempt them so far
rs the incident to human agencies
will permit from improper influence. Here the
demurrer confesses that being induced by the
offers OF respondent to take for his own use only
81, 200 out OF the 81. 600, the aggregate fees of the
desired office of judge of the probate court, two
hundred of the voters and tax payers of the
spondent's rival, changed their purpose and yo-
ted for respondent, who. but for such offer, and
their acceptance would never have been elected.
These admissions of the demurrer throw the
burden of the assumed lawfulness of his act up
on the shoulders OF the respondent, and the cues
tion. arising upon the admitted facts is whether
the means employ ed by him to secure his cleo
ton were lawful meAns-means such as this
court can sanction when the respondent, called
i uPOu ~ Jul / Vi QuO "dTEdulO 10 ulsClO9e MIS-
| title to the ofice of Judge of probate, discloses
also that his title must, for its validity, ulti-
mately rsst upon the means of whose employ
ment the state in her information complains.
| In the recent case OF State vs.. Purdy, SO Wis.
2l3. the question raised by this iormati
was learnedly and exhaustively discussed and
sired, and the conclusion thus reached, that
means similar to those employed in the pres mt
instance INST nc ", were ea not to be tolerated, and that the
declared invalid. Judge Collier said to the
voters in effect and with effect ''elect me pro-
bate Judge OF your county. and no suitor who
half the fees which the law allows.n Thus
making the Office which he sought not a matter
not necessary in this case to show, as claimed
by counsel for respondent, that he or those
who voted for him; have been guilty OF ths
crime of bribery in its strict sense.
Certainly nothing can be more palpaLly pr.ju.
diclal to the good ofthe public than to have places
of the highest concernment in the due execution
whereof the happiness OF both king and peopl,
doth depend, disposed OF not to those who are
most able to execute them. but to those who
thing be a greater encouragement to industr,
and virtue than to see those places OF trus,
ana honor which ought to be the rewards O.
those who by their industry and diligence
have qualified themselves for them. conferred
on such who have no other recommendatio1
but that Of being the highest bidder neIthel
can anything be a greater temptation to officer.
to abuse their power by bribery and extortior
and other acts OF injustice than the con
- ~ SiSut SApcuoS tUtS were u
in gaining their places, and the ~necessit,
or sometimes streaming q point to enabI,
their bargain to answer their expectation
The sale or ofdces may Justly be ranked Al
an ofense against the political economy OF thu
state. The doctrine which we think is establish
ed and which we believe to be sound in princi
pie 10. that d vote given tor Il candidate for
public Office in consideration of his promise il
case he shall be elected, to donate Il sum o
money or other valuable thing to a third party
whether such party be an individual, II county
or any other corporation, is void
We must reiterate the tatement that the offer
IN this case made by respondent differ in no es
genital particular from the Wisconsin case. TIL
offers in each case are equally deserving of con
domination and were in spirit and purpose tn
same.
The transaction of which the state in tn
present inetance complains, may have been en-
tered into with laudabls motives, but il is, a
We think has been successfully shown, decided
y demoralizing in its tendencies and uttsrl,
subversive OF the plaInest dictates of publI
policy. The maxim in such cases should b.
dbsfd principles, and it ID only by a rigid OBJ
servance OF which by the courts, that the purlt,
of elections can be preserved. The legislator
oil this state has, as We are informed, at its las
session, enacted a statutory prohibition agains
the employment in elections OF agencies such a
We have in the preceding pages condemn ned
thus giving legislative recognition to the prlnci
Piles herein enunciated. Holding these views
the will he held sufficient in law
the objections taken thereto by the demurrer
not we'll taken, and the respondent required Il
plefd further. All concur.
l 7. a. SHERWOOD.