Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1896-07-31
THOSE BANGOR cAucusEs.
Secretary eessendsn Does Not Think He
Should be Asked 10 Decide.

l
Augusta, Me-, July Is. 1896.
have received the nomination cert
llcates. correct IN form, Utepublican). G
Massps feari th ha'me me- and stetson-th
the certificates. correct form, Of Messr,
Parkhurst Beal and Porter-the NOMINEE
OF the minority caucus. Republican
ing to the difficulty existing in Ranro
lover representatives to the Ieeislatiir
and touching the matter | have to ga,
1st.-The Australian ballot law oblipe
me as an official duty, to print and sun
ply to the voters of the State an ofiicia
ballot. Among other provisions it bro
vides that political parties entitled t,
make nominations may make one nom
nation for each Office to be filed
| 2d.-The apportionment law makes Ran
gor an electoral district and apportion,
to the district three representatives I,
the Legislature. Therefore the Republj
cans of Bangor can nominate three can
didates for representatiVes-and thre,
only-not six. When | print the Bango,
ballot 1t can contain but three of the 81,
names above given. In other words. fol
the purpose of printing my ballot | mus,
disregard three of the six certificates
above referred to.
| 3d. know of no law constituting the
secretary Of State a court, either a law
or equity, none authorizing or directing
him TO consider or pass upon any question
| lying back of the certificates themselves.
| | know of no law which oblges the secre-
| inquire into. political party committee
action. party customs. or caucus facts
to mold hearings or pass upon evidence
to formulate or render opinions upon the
regularity or irregularity of proceedings
of primary caucuses; to make or to rem
der any Judgment upon the doingS OF
said bodies. AS | understand the law, the
entire responsibility of a party action
and party harmony rests upon the party
4th.-l know of no law which provides
for political party committees. regulates
powers. establishes their status, or
places them under any responsibility. eX-
cept in one case. viz, where a vacancy
exists.
5th.-Inasmuch as there are l57 electo-
raj districts in Maine, four parties en-
titled to make party nominations and
probably At least 5m party committees:
1t would seem that if the secretary of
State were obliged to enquire into or
take notice of the multifarious troubles
arising out of party committee differ
enceS, neGii2ences or quarrels. some eX
press provisions would have been made
for him to follow.
6th.-rhe ma iority faction in Bangor
contend that the ma jority of the commit
tee is the committee, and that | am
bound by their action. That the jor-
ty of Il committee is the committee is
generally sound proposition. Perhaps
it has its qualifications. Apply 1t to
political party committees Suppose the
majority of a party committee refuse or
neglect TIC call any sort of caucus. Sup
receive a proper certificate containing
nomination. Should | be justified in re-
fusing to print such a candidates name
on the official ballot? | think not. Go
step further. Suppose the whole commit
tee. a body unbound by oath. unrecog
niZed by law. purely voluntary body,
responsibIe--if responsible at all. only to
another purely voluntary body refuse to
call Il caucus and the remaining elements
of the party get together and send
proper certificate of duly made nominal
- I no. tftaH IN .pt limo
think not.
1th.-But the minority faction in Ban
gor contend that neither the majority of
the committee nor the whole committee
are justified in departing from the time
honored custom and usage of the party
ami adopting a new form of caucus; that
they were not elected with any such pur
pose in view: that they have exceeded
their powers. Why should | undertake to
settle this question merely for the sake
of printing an official ballot for Bangor?
Where is the law expressed or implied |
which makes il necessary for me to con- |
Germ myself with il? know of none. 1t
seems TO me that it Is not my duty, eN-
press or implied. TO inilict myself with |
party troubles In any party in any cleo |
toral district.
SO far as am concerned, can perform |
my whole duty in the Bangor case by |
simply drawing lots, if | choose to do |
so. for three out of the six names which |
| have received. when | get ready to print |
my ballot. | can then supply ballot |
can candidates, duly nominated under |
the provisions of law.
So far as | am concerned. do not ad-
nit that it is my duty to 90 behind the
nomination certificates to decide ques-
tons of law. equity. custom. usage. regu-
larty or irregularity. majority or minor
ity. or any other questions, either in the
Bangor case or any other. Why should |
| hamper myself, or my successors in |
office by a self-made precedent which
strikes me as extremely dangerous. and |
which might speedily lead to n condition
n hundredfold worse and wider than now
exists.
themselves into trouble. They ought to
get themselves out in justice to them
selves and the party.
The responsibility is theirs and not
mine. under our election laws. They can
if they choose harmonic their difficult
ties. This is their duty as well as their
privilege.
1t is not my duty to decide this or any
other case of like nature. 1t is my privi-
lege to avoid making decisions in such
cases. which l may be satisfied to do.
evading by people who have a different
opinion of what my duty requires me to
do Admitting that / may be in error.
yet have no doubt in my own mind. as
if proceedings can be had in the supreme |
court to correct errors of this kind. Gf
this be an error upon my partD which
is the opinioif> of some people and to
which I express no opinion. such pro-
ceedings can be instituted as readily, as
certainly and as surely, without. as with
any ruling or decision by me, because |
the facts are all open, plain and we'll
known to both parties In interest. viz. |
the respective candidates.
one more suggestion and | will close |
this already too lengthy communicat lion. |
Assuming for arguments sake. that my
line of reasoning is all wrong, and that |
it is my duty to deal with this particular |
case. as II now stands-how. and in what |
spirit shall | proceed? This case ii GER
tainly outside of any express statute law
that's what's the matter with 1t. 1t is
no case to which to apply 'parlia-
mentary' law. My attitude toward the
parties Is not that OF a Speaker or presi-
dent of legislative body. acting under II
system of rules. Common law has moth
ing to do with It.
The Australian ballot law not only does
not require me to be bound by the action
of majority of a party committee. but
by direct implication, would compel me
in certain cases. to refuse to be bound by
a majority of Il party committee, or even
by Il whole commit tee. The only aiterna-
tive would seem to be to dispatch It In AN
equitable way. to consider the equities
?nd all the equities or what to me seem
the equities.
| might satisfy myself. Could sat
iSfy all the parties?
Moreover if | should do this. the result
reached might be quite as "aggravating"
TO the warning factions. as the result
reached by drawing lots. because in my
opinion there are equities on both sides
and sound both I |