The Saint Paul globe., 1900-04-27

the action OF any Official delegated under
the law to prepare the official ballot OF
the city. Mr.. Bell was given no author
ity to name or make any nominations, as
four-fifths of the delegates elected to the
convention took no part in the pretend
ed convention at which he claimed the
resolution giving him such authority was
passed. Under this state of facts he ex-
pressed the hope that the court would
issue the order for relief as asked for in
the petition.
Corporation Attorney Markham, ap-
pearing for the city clerk. then read
long affidavit, prepared by the legal de-
partment of the city, and sworn to by
Jensen. Mr.. Markham stated that the
clerk did not desire to take any part in
the controversy as to which of the can
didates were entitled to places on the
ticket and for this reason had placed on
the official ballot the names of all per-
sons who had filed proper certificates of
nomination. This, Mr.. Markham said, the
clerk had done, not wrongfully, but under
instructions from the legal department of
the city.
7. r. Palmer, on behalf of the respon-
dents, read from the affidavits submitted
by Messrs. Bell, Wood ct al, minutes of
the meeting of the pretended convention.
He called special attention to the fact
that the temporary roll call showed 186
delegates present and entitled to seats.
AT this point, Judge Brill questioned if
valuable time was not being taken up by
the reading of the minutes Mr.. Palmer
thought not, and explained that it was his
purpose to show that there had been
split in the convention, and that the city
clerk had put on the ballot the names of
the nominees of both conventions, as he
was obliged to under decisions in other
states in like cases. Mr.. Palmer quoted
the same decision of the Michigan su-
preme court that Corporation Attorney
Markham had previously cited, and an
affidavit of Fred N. Van Duzee, a report
er for the Pioneer Press, to the effect that
the resolution appointing r. w. Bell and
a city committee had been read by f. G.
B. Woodruff and adopted. Mr.. Palmer
cited authorities on the proposition that
the city clerk had no choice but to put
the names of all candidates on the Of
tcial ballot and also that the courts could
do nothing but allow the names of both
factions of a party on the ballot and let
the voters decide.
L. ID. OBrten followed Mr.. P&lmer, AMI
seized on the point made by the reading
of the minutes of the convention, sworn
to by E. II. Wood. The case lie said,
was a very plain one. A convention had
been called, and 151 of the delegates as
sembled had voted together and made
nominations That another number of
delegates, not to exceed twenty could
override the majority of the convention
was not possible. According to the af-
fidavits presented here by the respond
ents," said Mr.. O'Brien, sit IS shown
that out of a total number of 20S dele
gates, 1856 answered to their names on
the temporary roll call. In the app,ica-
tion presented by the petitioners we have
the affidavits of 10S of the same pers rs
who answered to their names on the tenn
porary roll call, each one of them making
oath to the fact that they did not vote
for E. H Wood for chairman OF the COLI
Venticn, but did vote for J. -. Michael.
and remained in the convention and took
part in the nomination of Robert A
Smith, and the other nominees who were
chosen by the convention. This would
prove that the claim that a convention
was held other than the one preside
over by j. c. Michael was not founded OH
fact and this is borne out by the affida-
Wits presented not by the petitioners
alone, but by the affidavits presented by
the respondents.
The court" said Mr. OBrien, "can
take judicial notice that there is a DEM
ocratic party IN existence, and that the
trouble of the faction which is seeking
to disrupt the old party has been in this
court before on the same proposition. a
convention called by the Democrats can
not be overruled by a few men who SO
persons Illegally selected be placed on
the Official ballot There is no prete lse
that a majority Of the delegates Of the
convention voted for the resolution aD-
pointing Bell and a city committee. The
dozen or fifteen men might have passed
or pretended to pass, some kind Of res
olution until they were piack in the face,
but the fact remains that. the majority
! of the convention had nothing to do with
such action. The affidavit of Mr.. Van
Duzee that the resolution was passed
amounts to nothing, as 1t was not agreed
TO by a majority of the delegates This
is proven conclusively from the fact that
Jos of the delegates, more than a majority
| of the convention, make affidavit that
they did not participate in the convention
where the resolution was claimed to have
| been passed.
"The petitioners claim that Robert A.
| Smith and the other candidates nominat-
| ed by the convention, as we'll as those
/ placed on the ticket by the duly author
| lied committee, are entitled to a place
| on the ballot. That no other pers n with
| the word Democrat after his name should
| be allowed on the ballot except the per-
| sons nominated in the regular conven-
| ton or placed in nomination by the duly
| authorized committee. That the persons
who have filed nominations by petitions
| setting forth that they are Democrats
| have no right on the ticket.
| The authorities quoted by Mr.. O'Brieu
| to support the position taken by him on
| the point that the majority Of the con
| vention only had the power to nominate.
and the minority had no such power. were
! prepared by j. G. Michael and read to
| the court by Mr.. O'Brien Mr.. OBrien
again went back to the point that 1G3 of
| the delegates who answered to their
names at the time the temporary roll
was called, as shown by the affidavit pre-
sented by Bell and Wood had made af-
| fidavit that they did not take part In
the convention under the Craftsmanship
| of Wood, but acted in the convention pre-
sided over by J. c. Michael.
| The nominees of the majority of the
convention delegates should be left on the.
| ticket, and the names of Pottgieser and
| Bowlin, who, under petition, declare
! themselves Democrats, should be strick
en- off, for the reason that they had use.l
| the wrong designation on their petitions.
Senator Ives followed in an argument
that the majority must rule. The pur-
| pose of the Australian law in providing
| for an official ballot was to help the peo-
| pie and do away with candidates making
| up tickets of their own. If one man could
stand in a convention and order men to
| sit down, Or be put out of the hall. of
| what benefit was a primary law, or the
Australian ballot law. All that was need
] ed was to allow the one man to send
| word by postal card that he had selected
list of candidates. The duty of the
| court was to say what the qualified
| elected delegates to the convention had
done According to the evidence and
| facts all the names certified to by the
cOnVQnffnn uyhi Z Z