Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1896-12-11
THE SUPREME COURT
Election Contest Case in Argument
Before that Body.
JUDGE DICKsoN's ABLE PLEA
For The Board Of Canvassefs aBd
Against the Petition Much In
terest IN The Gu come.

I
Supreme court this morning In the
| petition of NJ. l.. Richie for a re-
etraining order TO prevent the State
| board OF canvassrrs from canvassing
tho votes cast at the last election for
district judges and other officers. The
| petition recites az sufficient cause for
the injur ction that the law known 80
the Australian ballot law, under which
the recent election was held, was not
legally enacted by the last legislature.
The grounds upon which this state.
ment lie made Ia that when the bill was
originally passed by the Senate and
House and submitted TO the Gov.
ernor for his approval; that his
the Senate with certain suggested
| amendments which were made by
that body and the bill passed sgain in
res ulaS order; that the bill was then
forwarded to the House, which body
did not pass the bill by yea and nay
| vote, as required by the Constitution,
| but instead simply concurred in the
amendments made by the Senste with
out passing by yea aud nay vote the
entire bill as amended. Another rcs.
son 10 alleged IN that the ballot WAS
not secret one and was therefore
unconsiii utionsi, and for that reason
| there were no legal ballots czet in the
| election ana that canvass cannot
legally follow.
| DEMURRER AND ANSWER.
The defense flied demurrer stating
that neither tie petition nor the VIII
| state facts 81 fiji iient to sntitls the
| petitioner 10 .De relief prayed. Al
answer to the petition was also fleu,
| which denied all the material ailegs-
lions OF the petitioner.
MIR. DICKSON.
Mr.. Dickson opened the argument
| for the defense. He said the import
nnce Of the question upon which de.
oision was now sought was admitted
by all. The object behind the action
OF the petitioner was to set OF naught
The will OF the people as expressed at
/ thu polls. There never was y more
honest and Tree ex preston Of opinion
OF the people than Was had at tho lBst
election. There Ia not single aliega.
lion Of fraud In the petition; II 10 not
alleged that any name OF any caudi-
date appeared upon the balloIs which
was mot entitled to be there. To call
things by their proper names the OBJ
ice. OF this petitioner anu those 10 ool-
fusion with him 10 to see II some
means can De discovered by which the
fres and emphatic expression of the
will OF the people Of kthis State
can be set at uaught and officers i'm.
posed upon them whom they
do not desirs.' This attack IL
made upon the validity OF the
election laws OF this State upon tech
nical error claimed to have been made
TN it,, passage. The Constitution pro-
vides that each housc OF tue Legisla.
lure shall keep and publish q Journal
OF Its proceedings daily, but there is no
way provided for verifying these
urnals, and, in met. the Constitu.
ton does not prescribe that any aye
and nay vote upon any bill or any
question except upon the request OF
i've members Of the House. Thus the
journal Of the Senate or the House can
not be- referred to for the purpose OF
this case, as Otficial records TO anthem
ticste legislative action.
Mr.. Dickson quoted numerous au-
| thOrities TO show that "IooseIy keptv
Journals can not be quoted as authority
| upon which to establish either the
validity or invalidity Of any legislA.
live action, for the reason that II tuch
liberty were allowed there is scarcely u
single legislative enactment which
would not be ut the mercy
Of any person having access TO
these journals. He also showed
that even the constitution prescribes
rules which shall be followed In the
passage OF laws and does not provide
for the entry OF such action In the
journal OF the legislature In such q way
as TO verify the law, then the journal
cannot be referred to IN passing upon
the constituti0nallty OF such law.
That the cOurts cannot 20 tbehinu
the enrolled bill to authenticate an
act.
Referring to the allegation that the
ballot was not secret one, for the
reason that each ballot was marked
with number corresponding with one
opposite the name OF the voter, Mr.
Dickson said that II the law was
complied with by the election judges
there could be no means OF ascertainipg
how a voter voted except in case OF
contest tor alleged illegal voting, when
the number would be unsealed. II the
Judge OF election fails to seal this
number down securely, 60 that 1t can
not be seen, thar officer has simply
failed and neglected to do his duty,
but this fact does not invalidate the
law under which the neglect occurred.
The law makes ample provisions for
perfect secu rity Of the ballot but n the
election officers fail TO do their duty
1t Is not the fault OF the law, but
makes the officers action criminal.
The numbering provided by law is for
the purpose OF punishing persons who
vote unlswiully and without legal
right. For instance: the presidential
electors from this state are chosen
by majority OF six votes and ii should
be discovered that seven Illegal
voters voted at the election Tor
these electors. This fact estab-
lished It becomes necessary to
prove for whom these illegal
votes were cast. 1t 10 for this purpose
the system o! numbering Is adopted.
The nrme o! the illegal voter is found
upon the list OF those persons who
voted and the number opposite his
name il noted. Then the court breaks
the seals upon all the ballots found in
the box until the number corresponds
ing with that Of the illegal voter IL