The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1896-01-29

| HOt supply inns. aIttF "a CAUCUS III
| recognized pursuance or that call had been
| organized in the hotel parlor. The only
way was 10 start anew after due notice
| under another call fro N the committee
| man. or II he would not act from q suit
| able number OF Democratic voters who
would. As protest against the validity
| OF the principae caucus. the second Is not
| without effect. But as a body entitled to
make Democratic nom minations we cam
| not sustain 1t any more than the other.
X. W. Archibald. =. j.
Gunster J. concurs. Edwards J. dis
sents.
Judge Edwards Opinion.
The opinion in which Judge Edwards
| disSents is as follows:
The contest in this case is as to the val
idity or regularity Of TWO certificates of
nomination for ward offices in the Twenti-
eth ward of the city of Scranton.
/. The caucus of jan. 10 was called by
| Timothy Lavelle, a mern ber Of the Demo-
| cratic city committee. 1t was called by
| him because the rules of the Democratic
party in this city require that member
for ward offices in any particular ward
shall be called by the member of the
I.avelle was the only person having au-
thority to call "a caucus In making the
call he did not use the words Democratic
caucus 1t was not II ecessary, although
| IT would have been better II he had. He
had no authority to call any other than
for a Democratic caucus was well UNDER
stood as the result shows.
:. Before the polls Were opened the con-
tending parties selec ted a board of four
persons to conduct the caucus. The vot-
ers present acquiesced in the selection.
Two of the board represented one set
ing their opponents. The board made an
attempt TO be sworn. 1t was not u very
successful one; They tried to conform in
act OF 1881. But the law does not re-
quire that they should be sworn. A eau
Gus for the nomination of ward officers is
convention and bears the same character
in the eye of the law as city or county
convention. After the polls were opened
the contendinS parties and their friends
participated in the voting.
3. The caucus was called TO meet at
In the parlor of Corcoran's hotel. the hall
being part OF the hotel. The voting WAS
done through window from the outside.
This was done because it was more con-
venient. The candidates and voters un-
derstood this. There is no evidence that
anybody failed to vote on this account.
Total Number OF Votes Cast.
a. A large number of votes were cast.
ers was preserved and is before the court.
one set of candidates Were successful.
The majority for the office OF school con-
troller was over 2OJ.
3. Soon after the polls were opened a
contention arose as to he right OF Repu;D-
licans to vote at Democratic caucus.
Challenges We're made upon this ground.
1t was contended by a part of the board
that the Republicans of the ward, being
vote at the caucus because they would
have no caucus or Gu ndidates of their
own. and that they ought to have voice
in the selection of the nominees. Several
such votes We're taken under a challenge
and subsequently Without challenge. The
numbe: of these votes was fixed by one
witness at - and esti mated by another
at ~. These votes did not change the re-
suit However, plausible the contention
1t was "a mistake for Republicans TO vote
at this Democratic caucus: Under no cir
cumstances can Rep ublican vote at Il
Democratic caucus, or a Democrat at a
right 30 receive such votes even If the
voters were willing to swear that they
would support the nomi nees of the caucus.
est in their action but they were mis-
taken. Nevertheless l am clearly of the
opinion that the character of the caucus
was not changed 1t was and remained
a Democratic caucus.
6. After o'clock several of the voters,
dissatisfied with the action OF the beard,
agreed upon. went ups tairs to the hall,
selected another board. and voted for
their nominees. Forty-seven votes We're
east Most If oS not al an Of the 'rs persons
the other caucus. There is no possible
way in which the certificate of nominal
ton or the nominees of this second eau
Gus or meeting can have any standing un-
der the law OH the official ballot.
Salient Fact in the Case.
The salient fact in this case Is, that over
COO Democrats met In the Twentieth ward
to select their nominees for ward Offices.
The record of their action is before us.
Shall We nullify their action and set their
VIII aside on mere echnicalities? the
tendency OF judicial con Struction Is to give
effect to and not to frUlstrate the will of
the voters. Our court has already taken
a decided stand in this direction. In the
marking of ballots, we have held tina
where the intention of the voter can be
clearly gathered from the ballot We count
it. although 1t is not marked according to
the technical requirements Of the Baker
ballot law. And the courts have gone so
far as to hold that an election without II
proclamaton viii % be susta,ned haa II ns !, apI
knowledge of it. When the member of the
Democratic committee called the caucus
Of Jan. 10, did not the Democrats OF the
Twentieth ward know hat 1t was to be
Democratic CAUCUS. The result shows
they did. because they ATTENDED In unu-
sually large numbers: f If votes % We're ssI5 I'm,
be thrown out. This is the law governing
general elec ctions. We have no right, t,
cause twenty-nine or sixty-tive persons
voted. who had no righ to vote. wh2thar
they voted mistakenly or not. II such
action is correct, the receiving Of one
vote improperly and under the circum-
stances detailed would destroy the general
character of the caucus.
My ruling in this case Is In the same
line with my ruling in the Sixth ward
case, and in the Seventh ward case. heard
about Il year ago. Two caucuSeS were |
held in each of these cas- eS. There were ir- |
regularities in the call for the caucus in
each case. but the principle on which boil
cases was decided is the same principle
on which decide the present contention. |
that If the will of the majority of the |
voters can be ascertained it must stand:
For these reasons i dissent from the |
Judgment of the court entered in this |
case. / consider the certificate of nOmi- |
nation signed by Jud ge, Gibbons and !
Moeller valid and that the candidates |
named therein should be placed on the |
official ballot in the Democratic column. |
The other certificate of nomination l con-
slider invalid. II. NJ. Edwards, A. l.. ].