The Anaconda standard., 1895-04-16

for public ONCE. as in this act provided shall at
least 20 days before election. in a
writing signed by him. notifying the officer with
Whom the certificate nominating him Is by this
act required TO be filed. thar he dec mes such
nomination. such nomination shall be void.
''sec. ~. should any person So nominated
ale before the printing OF the tickets. or decline
.ne nomlnatlon rs In this act provided. or
come lnsnfncient or imperative from any cause,
| tue vacancy or vacancies thus occasioned may
pc nlled IN the manner required for the original
NOMINATIONS III the original nomination was
| made by party convention which had dele
gated 20 committee the power TO fili vacan-
OF such vacancies proceed TO fIIi the same me
chairman and secretary OF such committee shall
thereupon make and flie with the proper osncer
| certincate setting forth the ca sc OF the va
| cancy, the name of the person nominated. the
oiice Tor which he was nominated. the name OF
sne person Tor whom the nominee Is 10 be sub
| thorlzed 10 MI vacancies. and such further in
formation as Is required TO be given In an origi-
| nal certificate OF nomination. The certificate
| so made shalt be ex cuted in the manner pre-
| scribed for the original certificate OF nomlna-
tlon. and shall have the same force and effect
as an original certificate OF nomination When
| such certificate shall be fled with the secretary
OF the state he shall, In certifying the nomina-
name OF the person who has thus been nomi, mi
| mated 70 MI o vacancy In p ace OF that OF the
origi nal nominee. And In the event that he
has already sent forth his certificate, he shall
forthwith certify 10 the clerks OF the proper
| counties. the name and description OF the per
son SO nominated TO MI a vacancy, the oliice he
II nominated for. the party or political principle
| he represents. and the name OF the person for
/ whom such nominee Is substituted"
| The peoples party convention delegated TO its
county committee power TO ffll vacancies on
the peoples party county ticket. The county
committees hed the vacancy caused by the
han. and by fling certificate of his nomlna-
| ton with the county clerk. That certificate
was defective. and did not comply with the
L nrOVlslOuS \ D m n mar
ticuiars as follows. which we will note seriattn;
]. whitmlre did not ''ecline the nomina-
| ton as In this act provided" (section i2.) To
decline a nomination as In the act provided. Is
70 notify, In writing signed by the party deciin-
Ing, the otficer with wn ON the certificate nom
mating him Is by the act required 10 be iied,
that he declines such nomination" (section
2. Hallahan's certificate itself does not show
that he was nominated 20 MI vacancy.
3 Ihe certineate does not set forth the
cause OF the vacancy;
th. person for whom Halahan was TO be sub
committee had authority to nil the vacancy.
O. The certificate does not set forth In direct
language the business address OF Hallahan.
language the business address OF the chairman
or the secretary OF the peoples party commit
| tee.
In these seven items IN making and fling OF
Hallahan's certificate. it did not technically
comply with the provisions OF sections n and u
sons the distri { court held that Hallahan was
not nominated, and not being nominated.
was not elected treasurer OF Deer Lodge
| county.
OPINION OF THE COURT, BY DEWITT. ,.
We are OF opinion that the learned Judge
| OF the district court was justified In holding as
he did. as TO Hallahan's certificate In this case,
on the authority OF Price v. Lush, 10 Mont 81.
We are also or opinion that while the Judgment
| In Price v. Lush was probably correct, the doe
trlnce OF that case must be modified In some
American decisions upon the "a Austraiian sI ballot
can authority was al the command OF this
AS to the decision OF Price v. Lush, perhaps
we may remark that we are willing. In The Ian
gnage OF Justice Field, in the case OF Barden V.
Northern Paclflc Railroad Co.. 154 u. ). 3s2. to
the views now expressed. IL is more Important
that the court should be right upon later and
more elaborate consideration OF the eases than
consistent with previous declarations Those
doctrines only VIII eventually stand which bear
rirnce. F"
In what respect we shall modify the decision
OF Pr.ce '. Lush VIII appear as we treat the
We shall proceed TO examine the defects In
Mr; Hallahan's certificate. as they are set forth
and numbered In the statement preceding this
opinion. and shall state our views as TO what
should be the result OF these defects when they
are brought to the consideration OF a court az
shown by the courts finding OF facts In this
case.
1. II is true that Whltmlre did not decline
his nomination In the manner provided by sec
tons IL and ~ OF the Australian ballot law.
That statute provides that a written decinatlon
shall be ned with the 0fficer with whom the
certificate OF nomination OF such person declin-
ing Is required to be filed. The county clerk Is
that ofiicer In this case. But whltmire's GER
tincate OF nomination had never been filed. lie
refused the nomination before the time expired
In which his certificate must be filed. This
county clerk had no evidence filed with h m
showing
He officially knew nothing about whtmire's
nomination. IL anominee declines a nomina-
ton, u certainly Is an expedient provision OF law
that the officer holding the oihclal record OF
the nomination shah have a formal writ
date, that such onicer may have substantial au-
thorty for leaving nominees name of Of the
ticket. But the county clerk needed no such
authority In this ease TO leave Whtmire's name
from the ticket. lilo never would have put his
name on the ticket. He never had authority so
TO do. What Is the substantial reason then OF
requiring the county clerk TO have authority to
leave Whitmires nams OF Of the ticket when
he never had authority to put it on? IL would
ee ceremony wholly useless to any one. bene,
nting no one. securing no one any rights. and
the omission OF II working no one any wrong
Without holding fully. In this respect. that the
reason OF the law ceaslng the law ceases. for
there might perhaps be circumstances when the
question could be raised In some connections
which do not now occur to US. where we might
not be prepared 10 hold tina. the law ceased;
yet We do hold that. under the findings OF facts
In this case. which we shall more fully discuss
below. the omission OF Whitmire to file a dec
lination with the county clerk was not such a
substantial disregard OF the statute AS TO wholly
nullify Hallahan's nomination. In consideration
or the other facts OF this case. and the time and
place aud manner In which the objection was
made for the first time.
Our view OF this defect No. I disposes OF
defect NO. 2. (See statement OF facts.) Halla-
hans certificate did not snow hat he was nom
mated 70 fili a vacancy. but as Whltmire's cer-
tl1cafe had never been filed, the Information TO
the county clerk thai Hallahan's Nomination
was 70 fill vacancy was not useful or Import
ant. When Hallahan's certincats came to the
county clerk Ii worked no change In the records
as .ey were before the clerk. No nomination
having been fled with the county clerk. he had
no Substitution 10 make. Htllahan was not to
be put In tho place OF anyone alreadv ON the
records OF the clerk. BY no possibility could
anyone be injured upon the records with the
clerk. Again. was this such a substantial dis
regard OF the statute as should nullify Halla-
hans nomination, when the question Is raised
as ir Is IN this ease?
Defects and are that the certlseats does no.