The San Francisco call., 1896-10-09
Effect of a Decision Rendered
Yesterday in the Supreme
Court.
ARE NATIONAL DEMOCRATS p
The Supreme Judges Find This Title,
Adopted at indianapolis, Is
Not Deceptive.

The State Central Committee of the
Bryanite Democracy failed yesterday to
shut out the National Democracy, other
wise known as the Gold Democrats" !"
from a place on the ticket under an ap-
propriate designation. The Supreme Court
decided that the gold Democrats are en-
titled to designate their electors as the
candidates Of the National Democracy.
The golo Democrats, learning what was In
the wind, rallied in considerable force and
put up strong arguments, which were
found to be correct by the majority of the
Supreme Court, sitting in bank.
The court proceedings, which took place
yesterday afternoon, were far from being
devoid of general public interest. The
gold Democrats sent up a delegation of
attorneys, who sat in block on one side
of the courtroom. The representatives of
the Bryan Democracy sat together, and
there was quite a collection of interested
observers, mainly political. The proceed
ings had not advanced far, when Attor-
ney-General Fitzgerald, who appeared in
behalf of the Secretary of State, had few
whispered words with Nj. McEnerney.
Then he rose and said that the
part of the application which he was pre-
pared TO argue WOulu not DC uTSeQi SO ne
had nothing to argue.
This left the only issue before the Su-
preme Court straight-out tight between
the two wings of the Democratic party,
the National Democracy and the Bryanite
Democracy.
Justices Henshaw, Harrison, Van Vleet
and Tenn pie signed the following opinion,
which was rendered by Justice Henshaw:
We are of the opinion that the application
tpro rff of or,fiot ec1p no danfa fad hnl6
ing that the designation National Demo-
cratic is not calculated to deceive.
Justice Mcfarland copcurred and de-
livered the following opinion:
concur in the judgment; but also think
that the question, under the peculiar form
which this position for writ takes was deter
mined by the Secretary of State when h@nc-
copied and FLED tbe certificate, ana that his
action cannot be reviewed on this proceeding
The dissenting Justices were Justice
Garroutte and Chief Justice Beatty. The
former simply wrote, II dissent" Chief
Justice Beatty wrote:
cannot distinguish this case from the Dolan
and Ewing cases, in which we held that can
didates nominated by petition are not entitled
TO u party designation, which might mislead
voters.
When the decision was received, which
was late in the afternoon, the telephone
was kept busy ringing up those who had
. DIcSSSQ q QCSlT6 To DC DOllHGu III ONCE.
"a designation was forced upon US,
said Edward r. Taylor, speaking for the
gold Democrats, "by the Chicago conven-
tlon. We took up a name by which the
Democratic party has been known for
many years past. We are the Democratic
party. We had to take some name and we
are entitled to this"
Robert Y. Hayne said for the gold Demo-
Gratis: "1f our party choose to take the
name of Democrat it does not lie with the
court to say that Democrat means one par
ticular thing. The court can only inter-
fere if deception is posi- ble"
Garret McEnerney made the only argu-
ment for the Bryan Democratic State Ce n
tral Committee. He said that the desig-
nation of National Democratic party on
the ticket would tend to deceive voters.
Tne Democratic (Bryan) party is the real
National party, but does not use the name
National" because it is unnecessary. But
the omission of National from the Dem o.
cratic designation did not entitle any other
party to use the National Democratic
title. In copyright case this would be
an infringement. Voters can be deluded
by the use of this designation.
The dropping of the application for ont
designation viii. result in the Democratic
(BEyan) and Populist electors being named
twice on the ticket, according to Attorney
Generals Fitzgerald's view of the case,
once under the heading of Democratic
Electors" and again under the heading of
Peoples Party Electors"