The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1896-12-12

Support of the Petition.
Yesterday morning at 10 o'clock, in
the supreme court. with a full bench,
the petition OF Judge NJ. L. Ritchie for
a writ of mandate to prevent the state
board o. canvassers from canvassing
the votes cast at the recent election
and issuing certificates to the success
ful candidates was called up for argu-
Inent and at the same time came up
the petition OF County Clerk Stanton
for writ OF habeas corpus on the
ground that he was wrongfully re-
strained of his liberty, having been
fined and ordered committed by Justice
Kelson, until the fine is paid, for hav-
ing refused TO issue a certificate of
election to L. W. Wilson, duly elected
a member of the legislature from the
Eighth representative district.
The two cases were so nearly allied
that it was agreed TO argue them to-
gether. Senator Arthur Brown, Attor-
ney John NJ. Zane and Judge Loot
borrow appeared for the petitioner and
Hon. W. II. Dickson, Judge Judd, Hon.
J. L. Rawlins. Judge Henderson and
Attorney r. 3. Sheperd on behalf OF
the Democratic committee in opposition
to the granting OF the petition.
The petitioner contended that the
election was void ana of no account
because that the act of the legislature
making provisions for the election had
never become a law. in that it did not
appear from the journal of the house
of representatives that the act had
been passed by that body by a yea and
nay vote, as required by the constitu-
ton.
That the title OF the, act does not
conform 20 the requirements Of the
constitution because that the sct con-
tains more than one subject
That the ballot was not a secret one
and in that regard did not conform to
the requirements of the constitution.
That there was an emblem on the
ballot by which the voter could make
a cross and thus the voter was COM
PEELED TO vote a ticket that was not his
choice.
And finally that the act in relation 10
elections, defining offenses against the
same and prescribing Dunishments
therefor was never legally passed, hav-
ing been passed. then amended and
never voted on as a whole after being
amended.
DEFENDANTS ANSWE R.
The defendants counsel. to begin
with, fled u demurrer and answer TO
the petition.
The demurrer was . general one and
simply stated that neither the petition
nor the writ states facts sufficient 10
entitle the petitioner 10 the RELIEF
prayed FOR. or any relief whatever.
In the answer it is denied that each
and ever or any OF the ballots cast
in the district mentioned in the petit
ton and writ We're so numbered that
after the number had been placed
thereon and The corner turned down
and oasted down with mucilage the
number could be read by holding the
ballot 70 the light. or that the Judge
or other person seeing il could tell by
whom i was cast or in what manner
and Tor whom any voter voted. except
by uniawfully breaking the seal.
Il is denied that the ballot was not
secret ballot and alleged that all said
ballots We're secret ballots
It is then set out that the petitioner,
Judge Richie. was q candidate at the
election nd accented the nomination
on the INDEPENDENT Republican ticket
ard his name was on every ballot cast
in the district and that he never at any
time prior 20 the election made any
objection To the form of the ballot pre-
uared for the voters and never objected
TO the election being held under the
law mentioned in the petition and writ,
but in all respects acQuiesced in the
holding of the election, and in the
method by which it was conducted and
the form and manner Of the ballot fur
l:ished as in the petition and writ al
legged TO be used by the voters at the
election
HON. W. II. DICKSON.
Mr.. Dickson opened the arguments
for the defendants and said in sub
stance that the great question now was
not who shall hold the Offices men
toned in the petition, but whether the
whole election shall be declared void
Their honors would not err in taking
cognizance of the fact that the cleo
ton was a fair and square declaration
of the peoples VIII; that an election
was never conducted in a more ordcrly
and upright manner; that there was no
intimidation, no fraud, and no allega-
lions OF fraud or misconduct of any
KIND were made il the petition. But
in plain language the object of these
proceedings was to see if way could
not he found by which the viii of the
neople. clearly expressed. could be set
at naught and officers * HON they did
not want thrust upon them
Mr.. Dickson then took up the points
raised IN the petition. first that the
bill authorizing the election had not
been passed by & yea and nay vote on
which he argued that according to
the constitution It was not comDetent
to go behind the enrolled bill. and if it
were. the fact of the minutes not
showing that the bill was passed by
yea and nav vote was not competent
evidence TO prove that the bill had
not been so passed. Mr.. Dickson read
unanimously from authorities in sup
port Of these arguments. which seemed
to establish without any question of
doubt that the enrolled bill could not
he impeached in any way by the jour
nal Journals Of the legislature were