Cameron County press. [volume] (Emporium, Cameron County, Pa.) 1866-1922, 1900-11-22


Maloney of Venango and Frank X.
Blumle Of Cameron will be forced to
defend their right to represent their
counties.
Word was received from Harrisburg
last night that J. +. Burke and Senator
S. J. McCarrell had appealed to the Su-
preme Court from the decision Of Judge
Simouton of the Dauphin county courts
in sustaining the nomination papers of
Lewis Emery, Jr., candidate Of the
"Lincoln" party for Congress in the
Twenty seventh district Dispatches
from Mexican county announces the
intention of Thomas f. Richmond and
M. II. Houghton, Republican candidates
for assemblymen, to contest the seats
of Boyne and Cotter. The same thing
may be done in Venango and Cameron
counties, as the grounds are the same
as those in Mexican. The action is not
taken to secure votes for Col. Quay for
United States senator, as he will have
been reelected long before the contest
could be finally decided. The proceed
ings have been instituted simply with
the hope that the Republican candidates
in Mexican can secure their rights.
WHY EMERY CARRIED M'KEAN.
Had not Lewis Emery, Jr., been al
lowed to use circle on the ballot under
the head of Lincoln" party he would
not have carried Mexican county. He
had been nominated by the Democrats
of the district and the name appeared
in the regular Democratic column of
the ballot. A combination of indie
pendents, styling themselves the ''Lin-
coin" party, also made Emery candi-
date for Congress and placed the
Democratic and fusion legislative tick
cts in the four counties of the district
on the ballot with him. Joseph G.
Sibley, the Republican nominee for
Congress, objected to Emery's use of
the "Lincoln" party column There
had been similar cases decided by the
Dauphin county courts and the papers
of the combinations assuming to be
parties were declared invalid. Senator
! McCarrel, who represented the Repub-
| lican state committee in election con-
tests, and James F. Burke, private
council for Mr.. Sibley, carried the case
into the Dauphin county courts. Judge
Simonton listened to the arguments and
! promptly decided in favor of Mr.. EN-
cry. Notice was then given that an
appeal would be taken to the supreme
court. The "Lincoln" column was
used in each of the four counties of the
district. These Republicanswho want
ed to vote for Emery could mark the
Republican electors and then go over
to the 'Lincoln" column and by plac-
ing an X at the top vote was cast for
Emery and the Democratic or fusion
candidates for assemblymen. Had it
not been for this assistance the two
members in Mexican and one each in
Venango and Cameron counties would
not have been elected.
FORMER DECISIONS FAVOR sIBLEY.
Judge John Stewart of Franklin,
while presiding over the Dauphin
county courts in 1898, handed down
several decisions which fit this case.
In passing upon the papers of the Citi-
zens party of Philadelphia, he said:
One clear distinction the law makes is between
| combinations which are parties and those which
are less than parties; Every party is necessarily
| bnation is party is very far from being true.
The distinction is easily discoverable in the diff
| ferenu provisions which are made for each kind
of combination in the act of 1893, as amended by
| the act of 1897, and known as the ballot law.
| To discover what is meant by the term political
party, we are thrown back upon the act, or series
| of acts, which relate to the general subject and
to these we are confined. Confessing our inabii-
ity to put it all within the limits of definition
| we can yet indicate certain essential character
lstIcs which are sufficient for present purposes.
| We have already referred to one the combiDa-
ton must have polled certain proportion of the
highest vote cast ut the next preceding election.
Another is, that it must in its aims and purposes.
be as broad as the state ITSELF That is to say its
| purpose must be to accomplish results affecting
and concerning the entire citizenship, distin-
guished from those of particular section dis
trict. Not that it must have supporters in every
political subdivision of the state; it may have
them but in single county, and yet be political
party; but its object must be of general concern,
SO that 1t can invite to its support the people of
the state, irrespective of locality Where both of
these features are found in any combination ii is
party within the legislative meaning; where
either is lacking it is combination less than
party.
In order to give even reasonable efficiency to
our ballot system the distinctions we have indi-
Gated must be observed and enforced. We are
bound to assume thatthe Legislative idea includes
nothing in the term political party that would
make the official ballot an absurd or practi-
cable thing, and unless that we require that a
party have the comprehensive purpose indicated,
the ballot must come to tn at complexion.
PREVENTS POPULAR WILL.
There would then be nothing to prevent the
| membership of any of the established parties
from dividing and sub-dividing themselves ON
| purely local issues without any other limit than
| the two per centum requirement. The result
might very well be ballot appalling in size and
confusing in the variety ofits contents. 1t is easy
| to understand how such ballot would not only
| be most fruitful source of controversy, but
would prevent anything like a fair, intelligent
| expression of the popular will. Another result
| would be that the individual elector could be
member of several parties at the same time.
In the case of Steir VS.. Martin, secre-
-