Western Kansas world. [volume] (WaKeeney, Kan.) 1885-current, 1890-12-13
NOT ADMITTED.
DELEGATES FROM WESTERN COUN-
TIES HAVE NO RIGHTS.
A Decision by the Supreme Court in
the LobdeII Case-The CanVassing
Board Did Right in Refusing to IS
sue Certificates to the Nineteen
Delegates.
From the Topeka Capital.

From the Topeka Capital.
The supreme court yesterday de-
cided the Lobdell case. LObdell
claimed to be elected as member of
the Legislature from Lane county,
| which was an unorganized county at
the time of the apportionment by
the legislature for senators and men,
bers of the house of representatives.
He had made demand upon the
state board of canvassers for a certl-
fcate as a member Of the house,
claiming that as his county had cast
$50 legal votes at the late election
he was entitled to a certificate. The
board of canvaSsers refused his re-
quest and he brought his proceeding
in this court to obtain a certificate.
His attorneys were Messrs. Rossing-
ton, Smith & Dallas and Colonel A.
L. Williams. The board of canvas
sers were represented by Attorney
General Kellogg and Hon. David
Overmeyer appeared also to oppose
the granting of a certificate, having
been appointed so to do by the chair
man of the state executive commit
tee of the alliance or peoples party.
The court denied the writ and held
that the board acted properly in re-
fusing to issue certificate to Mr..
Lobdell. The decision of the court
was based upon various grounds; first
there was no statute requiring or
authorizing the canvassers to issue a
certificate to any person claiming to
be elected a member of the house of
representatives from any county ex-
cepting from the representatives.
districts provided in the last appor-
tionment act; and second, as it ap-
peared that the board of state can
vassers had already issued certificates
to 125 representatives, they had no
power to issue for any number in
excess of that; third, because the
constitution Of the state ordains that
the number of representatives shall
never exceed 1875. and as this num-
Der was provided and regulated by
law under whatJis called the appor-
tionment act, none other could be
admitted or recognized as members;
fourth, because. the supreme court in
the case Of the state of Kansas
against John Francis, in 1882, and
reported IN the twenty-sixth Kansas
reports, 724, had already decided
that the house Of representative
could never legally consist of more
than 125 members, and to admit Nh
Lobdell would be to reverse the de-
cision and allow more than rs rep
resentative in the lower house of the
Legislature; fifth, because the decision
in State VS.. Francis, twenty-sixth
Kansas, had been rendered eight
years ago and the legislature had
since that time followed its construc-
ton of the constitution and had
acted in accordance with its ruling;
sixth, because there was no provision
of the statute or constitution which
permitted the canvassers to issue
certificates for members of the house
in excess of 125 and that number
had already been issued.
Chief Justice Horton delivered the
opinion orally and after referring to
the facts in the case and to the vari-
Gus decisions of the court previously
rendered against the claims of the
plaintiff quoted the decisive language
of Mr.. Justice Valentine in the state
VS.. Frances, 26 Kansas, 738.