The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1900-07-05
OENTRALIA POOR DISTRICT CON-
TEST.

OF CENTRALIA.
In the Court of Quarter Sessions of
Columbia County. No. IS, February
Session 1895.
Rule to show case why the Poor
District of Conyngham township and
Borough of Centraia should not pay
the costs OF the contest, contesting the
election of Director OF the Poor Of
said District.
OPINION AND ORDER OF COURT.
On the a8th of February 1896, the
petition for contesting the election of
Director of the Poor was quashed, and
the proceedings dismissed by the
Court. No order for the payment of
costs was made at that time. Subse-
quently this rule was asked for and
granted by the Court. The contest
failed by reason of there not being a
sufficient number of qualified elector;
to the petition. A large amount oftes-
timony was taken on the question of
the petitioners and some on the merits
of the contest, which latter however
was taken under objection OF the re-
spondent. When we granted the rule
we heard TO argument, and were in
clned to the opinion that there was
probable cause for the contest, and
that the Poor District should pay the
costs of the proceeding. What was
said then was mere 06iter dicfum and
binds no one. We would however
feel we'll satisfied, if we could see our
way clear now, to place at least part
OF the costs on the Poor District. We
say some part of the costs, because
we find upon examination that large
amount of unnecessary costs was
made, and such unnecessary costs
ought not to be put on the District in
any event. The costs claimed in this
case seem to the Coult to be out
rageous in amount.
! 1t is however unnecessary TO dis
cuss the amount Of costs, for under
the view we take of this case, we can
not impose any of the costs on the
Poor District. The fact that at least
twenty five qualified electors signed
the petition is prerequisite to the
jurisdiction of the Court to enter
tain the contest The proceedings in
this case were instituted pursuant to
Sec. g of the Act of 1874 p. l.. 2I3,
which for the commencement of such
proceedings requires, that for this
class of contests, at least twenty five
qualified electors of the election dis
trict who voted at the election con-
tested, shall have signed the petition.
1t follows, that unless there are the
requisite number of petitioners the
Court can render no decision upon
the merits of the contest. If courts
have no jurisdiction over the merits of
the contest, no decision which re-
quires an examination into the merits,
or, is based upon the merits, can be
rendered in such case. 1t matters
not at what stage of the proceedings
the want Of jurisdiction becomes mani
fest, the court has in such case no
power to do anything but dismiss the
proceedings.
If any person is liable in such case,
it is the party who attempted to in
stitute the proceedings. and failed for
want of compliance with all the pre-
requisites of the Act of Assembly. 1t
is contended that this case differs
from one in which the want of juris-
diction appears upon the face of the
proceedings. But we can see no diff
ference whatever upon the question
of the power of Court in the premises.
The want of jurisdiction though es-
tablished by evidence ahmaI, is just
as fatal in the one case as the other.
In either case 1t prevents a decision
upon the merits of the controversy.
1t prevents contest from being
made.
There was IN this case no legal
contest instituted and therefore all that
was done on such assumption is
mere nullity. The order of Court re-
terred to by Counsel under which
they claim to have proceeded, is no
protection and does not change the
legcl effect of what was done. This
order was not made by us, and we
presume the Judge who made 1t, was
probably not familiar with the status
of the case, but made such order at
the solicitation of petitioners or their
counsel. That such is the fact is in
ferred by us from the circumstance of
the respondent objectlng to going in
to the evidence on the merits, and
asking the commissioner to conhne it
to the qualifications of petitioners.
In this case the rule to quash the
proceedings, was the only matter de-
termined by the Court. When this