The record-union., 1892-10-18
TIE BALLOT DECISION.
Secretary of State Waite Has Some
thing to Say Thereon.
He Thinks the Supreme Court Has
Overlooked Some Points-The
Attorney-General Also.

In an interview with Secretary of State
Waite yesterday, the question was asked
what he had to say regarding the decision
of the Supreme Court just delivered at
Los Angeles, declaring part of the new
election law unconstitutional, and strik
ing from the head of the ballot the names
of all parties to be voted for straight"
He replied in substance as follows:
The decision suits me. 1t places all
political parties, old and new, on the
same footing, which is just what / have
been trying to do in another way. Either
all the parties complying with the law
should go on the ballot to be voted for
straight, or none. There is practically no
difference in principle in putting all par
ties oil or all parties on. The result is
the same. The right to declare law, or
any portion Of a law, unconstitutional,
on account of its injustice, belongs to the
courts.
- must seek to produce equality and
justice III the language, and by conStru-
ing the language of the law itself; and by
making equality and justice the touch
stones, L found warrant enough in the
language and spirit OF the election law to
give the Peoples party an equal right
with any OF the old parties on the ticket
| Ihe decision OF the Supreme Court pre-
NOiltS Ill0 GULL DllCdllOliS lIldJ were likely
to arise IN San Francisco. and, think, in
that city alone. 1t is, without doubt, a
Just decision"
To the suggestion that the Attorney
Generals office claims a triumph in the
decision, the Secretary said
II 90 not see where it comes in. The
Attorney-General would not have given
all parties an equal show. He was intent
on securing places at the head of the ticket
for three old parties and keeping Off an
other party OF considerable strength, that
had with hardship complied with all the
requirements of law. | was for giving
all parties an equal chance, and so acted.
The Supreme Court has sustained the
spirit OF my action, and not his. ] care
more for good results than the mode by
which they are obtained.
The Supreme Court has acted on lines
not laid down by the Attorney General.
That officer did not argue the unconstitu-
tlonality of the law. He was as far from
that as from desiring to give all parties
an equal show. The only consolation his
office can derive is in the wording OF the
explanatory addenda Of Justice Garoutte:
1T is very apparent from a reading of the
Act under consideration, in connection with
tue sections to which 1t refers, that in both
the spirit ana letter 1t was intended that only
those parties polling 3 per cent of the entire
vote cast at the last general election should
have heading upon the ticket"
Now, it is more apparent that Justice
Garoutte has not read the law carefully.
because the law says nothing about
general election at all. The whole mat
ter is treated in Section 11SS. He mis-
quotes it, and, l think, mistakes the
spirit of it. In my judgment it is not
very apparent, nor is it apparent at all
that, by the spirit and letter of the law,
only those parties polling per cent. are
entitled to heading, and 1 think can
show it.
First, as to the letter of the law: One
section QlS9) states what certificates of
nomination are to be certified to the Sec
retary of State. They include Presiden-
tial Electors and Representatives in Com
gress, the highest places this year known
on State ticket. Another section QI92)
provides for the certifcation to the Secre-
tary OF State OF nominations made by pc
tition.
This clearly shows that the letter of
the law intended to include new State
party which did not cast per cent. Of the
vote given at previous election, for there
Is clear provision what nominations are
to be certified to the Secretary Of State,
and nominations of the kind by means
of subscribing electors are included.
Another section Ql93) compels the
Secretary of State to certify to the County
Clerks what has been duly certified to
him. This must mean to include new
party candidates. And another section
u2l3) prohibits me from suppressing any
certificate, or part of any certificate duly
filed. This provision is amply made for
full State ticket foY new party consti-
tuted by subscribing electors.
Now" continued Mr.. Waite, 81 think
it is a forced judgment TO say that after a
party has, at great disadvantage and in
compliance with the law, obtained 5
per cent. OF the vote cast at a previous
election and Oainp1 tharaloyy tTn ,;,rl -,
recognition as party, on the public bal
lot, it is not entitled to all the rights of
any per cent. party. Taking the letter
of the law | do not discover any good
warrant for any such judgment, and less
warrant when the spirit Of the law is
consulted.
How is the spirit Of law to be
found? First, from the letter of it; but
generally from the presumption that the
law is founded in equity and Justice
Acting upon this presumption, there
should be more evidence than that Sec
ton 1877, referring to two previous sec
tions llS6 and IISO intended to secure TO
3 per cent. parties advantages over 5 per
cent. parties on the public ticket
ii "The latter part of another section QISS)
says distinctly that the certificate ofnom-
ination OF per cent. party shall have
the same effect as a certificate of nomina-
ton made by party convention.' What
same effect? All and every effect, as a
nomination made by a convention.
''If the intention of the Legislature had
been TO give per cent. party only the
right to put its Presidential Electors.
Congressman and full ticket on the pub
lie ballot, and no heading, the same ef-
feet language should have been qualified.
But it is not.
Keeping III view the presumption that
all laws are intended to be equitable,
fhara ia another nrpSunntion That +k;1
one was intended to be so and the bare
fact that Section 1897 refers to only sec
tions providing for nominations by con-
ventions is not conclusive that it is not,
'It is better and more rational to con-
clude that the non-reference to a party
making its nominations by petition was
an oversight, or that the declaration that
such nominations shall have the same
effect as those made by conventions
would be understood to give equal rights
to all parties"