The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1900-05-27
FAILED TO OBSERVE LAW
MCARDY'S DEMAND FOR RE
COUNT WEAK IN ESSENTIAL
PARTICULARS
SO POINTED OUT IN COURT
Judge Otis Takes Under Advise
:. ment the Points Raised, and
Early Decision Is
Expected.

Judge Otis heard arguments yesterday
on a motion to dismiss the appeal in the
election contest brought by ]. j. McCardy
against Louis Betz, who was elected
comptroller at the recent city election
When Judge Otis made an order last
Tuesday for the appointment Of referees
to recount the ballots for comptroller he
stated in the order that it was subject TO
the hearing on tn motion to dismuss the
appeal made on that day by J. c. Michael.
which would be argued May 70
The ground for the motion to dismiss
was that First Assistant Corporation At
torney Briggs, who appeared as attorney
for McCardy, had not complied with the
statutory provisions of the law in bring
ing the notice of appeal That the fail
ure to file the proper notice in the court
left the contestant without the jurisdic-
ton of the court, and consequently the
contest must be dismissed.
The points made by Mr.. Michael in sup
port of his motion to dismiss the appeal
were backed up by authorities, and were
as follows:
The election law of 1898, chapter T. pro-
vides the exclusive remedy in the nature
rights being purely statutory the terms
of the law must be strictly complied
with.
Section l67 provides the only means OF
comforting jurisdiction in case of a con-
test, viz. by entering with the clerk of
the district court, within twenty
days after election a notice of appeal
from the declaration of the canvassing
board. The rights of contest given in sec
tons ISL and 1S5 are dependent upon the
observance of section 1877 1t had been
held three times by the supreme court of
Minnesota that all of these provisions APP
ply equally to contests arising out of city
elections.
1t had also been three times distinctly
held by the supreme court of Minnesota
that the only way the district court could
acquire jurisdiction of the subject mat
ter of the controversy was by the timely
entry with the clerk of the court of a
proper notice of appeal, as required by
section 167 of the election law, and that
in default of such a notice of appeal the
parties cannot, even by consent, confer
jurisdiction on the subject matter upon
| the court.
Mr.. Michael said 1t might be claimed
that notice of appeal had been made in
/ this case. but the answer was that a bad
notice was no notice at all. The notice
! must be all sufficient. in and of itself
to invest the court with Jurisdiction It
| cannot be aided by the points OF contest
subsequently served. because until the
| court acquires full Jurisdiction by the
| entry of a proper notice of appeal there
/ is no contest or proceeding pending in
which TO serve notice or points of con-
| test. the points of contest not being in
any sense jurisdictional step The no.
! tice of appeal being the essential and
complete jurisdictional step in the pro-
/ ceeGings, it was necessary that the no.
| tiee OF appeal should by averment. or
! recital. show on its face all the facts
/ necessary TO bring 1t within the terms OF
the statutes comforting the rights Of