St. Paul daily globe., 1896-04-30
SCANNELL EFT AL. HAVE NOTHING
TO SAY IN THE INJUNCTION
PROCEEDINGS.
REPUBLICANS TO The FRONT
WALTER CHAPLIN, w. HI. LIGHTNER
AND MOSES CLAPP HAD
THE CASE.
ALL OF THEM CAMPAIGN ORATORS.
fort to Defeat the Democratic
Citizens.

A most peculiar spectacle was that present
ed in Judge Kelly's court yesterday. Scat
tered all about the room were men charged
by reputable citizens under oath, with high
crimes and misdemeanors They had been
joined with the city clerk, as the court stat
ed. in the case at bar, and yet none of them
put in a defense either by themselves or by
attorney, to the charges made against them
Matt Jensen, the city clerk, through his
deputy, Ezra E. McCrea, made answer, and
through his attorneys he pleaded that the
law would punish him for not placing upon
/ the ballots the names of any candidates that
might be presented to him. Mr.. Jensens
counsel was not, as might have been expect
ed, any of the regularly paid attorneys of the
city. Walter Chaplin. w. H. Lightner and
Moses E. Clapp, three of the star orators in
the employ of the local Republican cam
paign committee, were announced to the court
as the counsel for the city clerk; but in max
ing the announcement Mr.. Chaplin stated that
the other two gentlemen were engaged In
other courts and could not appear. They DID
not in fact, take any active part in the per-
functory showing made by Mr.. Chaplin. The
argument of the latter gentleman was disap-
pointing, from any point of view. 1t was
based on the increased cost which change
in the ballot, made up, would entail. TO
the mind of a practical printer listening to
him. this argument was silly and unworthy
consideration. The G l o b reporter could
make the necessary alterations more quickly
than he could write these lines. Mr.. Chapin's
other points were directed to making the
court believe that it had no power to go be-
hind the certificates of nomination handed
III to the city clerk-no matter, from what
source, long as they purported to be legal
and regular. In support OF this contention
he devoted one hour and a half to reading
four decisions, affecting merely the duty OF
the ministerial officer, to record names on
the ballot and never once touched on the
more serious allegations Of the complaint.
Before the argument began Judge William
Rodger and George Lendway, candidates LOT
the offices of justice of the peace ana alder
man of the Eighth ward, asked the court 10
be allowed to withdraw their names from
the Scanned ticket, and their request was
granted by the court.
1t was then that Jared How moved that the
restraining order be made absolute, because
none of the candidates named appeared IN
opposition to the allegations made in the
affidavits. and only the city clerk had put in
an answer, and that set up no valid defense.
Mr.. Chaplin said he would like to be heard
on the motion, and the court intimated that
he might proceed at once if he so desired. This
the counsel did, and at once uncovered his
line of defense, far as Mr.. Jensen was con-
cerned. The entire argument covered the
points outlined above-lateness Of the time,
increased cost to print ballots, and liability
of the city clerk to punishment If he failed
to put on the ballot all the names on GER
tificates turned into his office.
At the close of Mr.. Chapin's address, At
torney John H. Ives and S. P. Crosby in
formed the court that they were present to
care for the interests of Charles Kartak and
William johnson, who had filed nominations
by petition as well as the alleged regular"
nominations.
For the petitioners, Mr.. How stated that
unintentional mistake had been made in the
arrangement of the names in the petition.
| 1t not the intention, he said, to attack
! any certificates except those filed regular
| Democratic nominations. By mutual agree
| ment. the court made a ruling to that effect,
and then a recess was taken until O'Clock.
| The case was argued for the petitioners by
| Attorneys Norman Fetter Jared How F. w.
M. Cutcheon and T. D. O'Brien. Mr.. Fetter
| read the primary election law, and then
went on to argue that no primaries were held
in accordance with the law. Therefore, the
convention was unlawful and the candidates
| nominated thereby could not rightfully be
| placed upon the legal ballot. He read from
| a decision of the supreme court of the state
| in that went up from Itasca county, in
| which it held that the candidates of
| mass convention of the Republican party
| were entitled to a place on the ballot in
preference of those of a delegate convention,
| because it had been the custom of the party
| to nominate by mass convention In that
| county. This was previous to the passage of
| the primary election law and Mr.. Fetter
| argued that it showed that in the absence of
statute the supreme court recognized Gus
| tom as the proper rule to control in the nom
| fnation of candidates for Office and If this
was the position of the supreme court in the
| absence of law, there could be no question as
| to the illegality of placing the candidates Of
the Scannell faction on the ticket in the
present case, for the manner in which thev
were nominated was not only contrary to
| custom, but contrary to the statute that has
been passed since the supreme court rem
| dered its decision
Mr.. Fetter then suggested that he would
| read from some of the most important af-
ffdavits filed to more fully satisfy the court
that the nominations had not been made ac-
ccrding to law
The Court-I- understand there is no dis
| pute as to that tfaeti The evidence is uncon-
tradicted. n arfsd
Mr. Fetter--Yesy your honor, not word
has been offered In 5denial of all this mass
of testimony. and we, gould have brought in
ten times as much if we had had twenty-four
hours more time
Mr.. Fetters next read from a decision Of
! the supreme court of New York state in
which the legality of certain primaries was
passed upon, and the court in that decision
stated that it was the duty of the courts to
aid in relieving the primaries, as far as
possible, from the vicious influences that
operate through them to corrupt the poll
tics OF the country. Mr.. Fetter added that if
the courts could throw no safeguards around
the interests of the voters by preventing
such frauds as this, then there was no hone
of ever eievating the standard of American
| politics.
Mr.. How followed Mr. Fetter He said the
city clerk, nonpartisan public official, was
driven into the position of saying that no
matter how criminal the action by which
certain names are certified to him to be
placed on the official ballot there is no rem
edy at law to prevent those names from 60
ing on the ticket. This was peculiar posi-
tion for an officer to take, and one that re-
quired no argument 20 disprove. 'This is a
crime" continued Mr.. How, land If the af-
fd&vits admitted to be true mean anything
! Mr. Scannell and his associates are criminals
and ought to be sent to the penitentiary.
| No lawyer would vote for Scannell, no cler-
| T. Aldu NOuiu NOlG LUZ ulIl anu nope lot
| heaven hereafter. But we are not here to
protect such for they know the situation
| and are in no danger of voting for Mr.. Scan
nell. We are here to protect the poor, ignor-
ant voter. We don't charge the city clerk
| with o crime, but we aiming to remedy
a wrong that is being perpetrated through
him. 1 ask the court whether a confessed
| lie. confessed fraud, confessed steal
must GO unredressed. dc not care for my
sell or for any yoter to 1xhorn I can exnlain