The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1890-02-16
The Objections Filed Yester-
day.
QUEER" RULING MADE
The Commission Decides Nothing-It Advises
the Secretary to withhold
the Certificates.

%
} lore the Utah commission on Wednesda
TO the Issuance of certificates to the mayt
ana aldermen for the reasons set fort
| below The formal written objections wei
not filed till yesterday, however. Below
the document together with the opinion {
the commission thereon:
10 the Utah commission Salt Lake City, Utah
1.-The undersigned citizen and oualifie
e1ector OF the city of Provo, Utah county
nan ian Ierrltory, respectfully represents
That on the 10th day of February instan,
an election for officers of said city was he'll
at Inc Tune appointed by law therefor, am
tnat une returns of the votes cast at sail
electlon have been made to your honorabl
Doard Tor canvass and for further proceed
lngs according to law.
HE further states that Provo CITY i
known as city of the Third Class as de
nned IN the laws of said territory, and tn
electors OF said city were by said law
auGnoflzed to choose at said election tn,
following officers, viz. One mayor, sever
councllmen and two justices of the peace
besides other officers.
our petltl0ner represents that at the
sald election there We're voted for mavo,
by the electors of said city, one James
lsnouid be john E. Booth, and said Boott
III is alleged received the highest number O.
votes cast, and were he eligible, would
nave oeen elected to said office, but YOU
petitioner protests that said Booth is in.
competent and ineligible to said Office OF
TO receive the certificate of election
thereto on the following grounds:
InaG SAID Booth for long time prior to
SAID election and at said date was and still
Is polygamist and disqualified under thu
laws OF the United States from voting OF
holding any Office whatever That prior to
the passage of the law of Congress of
March ~, 1852 disqualifying polygamists
as aforesaid, said Booth was living with.
IN What is known as plural marriage. more
IMAM one woman as wives, and continued
Ia SAID relation afterwards until about 1883.
0hat ne mas not been, at any time pardoned
or amneStled by the President of the
United States, though at the time of said
election your petitioners do not charge
that ne was in the actual practice of DO
lygamy. - ~
Wherefore we pray that no certificate
OF election be issued to said Booth. and
that a new election to fill said Office be
ordered "
~ our petitioner further states that at
SAID election certain persons wer voted
1or as Alderman of said city, and that the
returns OF votes for said offices have been
MADE to your board, and your petitioners
claim that said votes were null and void
Tor the reason that no such officers were TO
De CHOSEN, and your petitioners pray that
said election of aldermen be declared mil
and void and that no canvas be made If
such votes and that you issue no certificates
10 tne persons appearing to be chosen.
Your petitioner further represents that
Two 1stlces OF the peace for said CITY were
voted Tor and elected as the law REQUIRES.
ana tnat the persons who received the
highest number of votes for said offices.
were legally elected and entitled to certifi,
Gates OF election, and they pray that they
receive from you the usual certificates to
entitle them to the same. Respectfuliv
sum bitted A S,vnH
chairman Liberal municipal committee
of Provo city,
Upon the filing of this document. the
commissioner issued the following ssorder
In relation to Provo municipal election
SALT LAKE CRY, Feb. Is, 1890
Whereas, A. Saxey, chairman Liberal
committee, Provo city, has filed petition
requesting that no certificate of election he
issued to James ~ E. Booth, who received
majority of the votes cast for mayor at
inc late municipal election, held in and for
SAID city, on the ground that he is a polv
gamlst under the law-althoueh not
charged with living in polygamy.
AND also that certificates of election be
Wltnneld from two persons voted for at
SAID election for the Office of alderman. and
That certificates be given to certain other
Two persons who were voted for at said
election for Office of justices of the peace.
on the ground that said City is city of the
third class, and that therefore no election
Tor aldermen could legally be held. The com
mission after due cons liberation in view
OF the fact that both questions are of i'm
portance and are open and mooted cues
tons, which should be judicially settled
ADVISES the secretary as canvassing officer
to withhold all such certificates of election
until the parties to be affected thereby |
nave a full opportunity to apply to the |
- Tor the proper order and Judgment !
'ngreon. u. l. GODFREY, Chairman"
mus the commission, acting upon an
tx parte statement without hearing. and |
even notifying the parties who
appear upon the face of the returns to be
elected, that amy objections have been
made to the issuing of certificates TO item.
las advised" that such certificates he
till the question is judieially
settled. The returns, we are Informed,
rave not been canvassed nor in
act opened, and the commission
las no way Of knowing whether the facts
tated in the petition are true or not They
loh't KNOW as matter of fact whether or
100 Que vote has been cast for j E. Booth.
lor whether aldermen, justices of the
,eace OR any other officers were voted for
ley could not know this for the secretary
nformed the writer yesterday after this
roer had been issued that the returns had
o. been opened. 1t will be remembered
hat the day after the election in this city
ne votes were all canvassed and the Ger
.ticates issued before one sun had set.
The Peoples party filed their
roteSts early in the dav on
t least before the certificates
1ere given, as to those wards they intended
Q contest. But they were not needed and
he certificates all went to the officers ap
caring to have received the greatest num-
er OF votes in the city.
LII thls Provo case the action of the com
MISSION Is different. Although the returns
we're received the day after the election
nd the certificates have been asked for by
ne persons appearing to be elected, thew
we're withheld and the returns have not
cen yet opened. And now the certificates
re 70 De further withheld till the courts
an determine the question. How does the
know that the courts will be
sked to adjudicate upon the matter! No /,
ase mas been instituted in court vet and
mere Is no lntlnation that such will be
one. questlon mas nssGbiaitted to
ne commission and they are asked to deter
line 1t, which they have not doue. They
ave neither granted. denied nor referred
ne petition. The commission either has or
as not Jurisdiction of the question involved.
They have jurisdiction, they should
lther say that the petitions should issue
the persons who appear to have the
reatest number Of votes cast for the
flee which they, by their appointee, the
eglstrar OF Provo, gave notice were topbe
iled at said election, or they should have
wen the parties chance to be heard. and :
pom such hearing determined the question :
far as they able to do. IT they have no
lrisdiction of the matter, as their opinion
'ould seem to indicate, then one would 9