The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1901-01-22

or regulating " exercises shall apply TO any con.
test arising out OF any election held before its
passage" Does the restriction here found pre-.
vent the Legislature from passing an act which
shall affect the costs Of contest which has
arisen out OF an election which preceded 1t?
NEITHENLETrER NOR SPIRIT
That certainly is not the letter, nor do we
think IL Is the spirit OF the constitutional pro.
vision. The two things prohibited the as.
signing of jurisdiction and the regulation oi its
exercise, by which understand the assigning
OF the contest TO a tribunal different from that
by which it would have been tried according to
the law as it stood when the election took place
or. without changing the tribunal, giving some
special cast TO the manner Of trying and dis.
posing OF 1t which 1t otherwise would not have
The manifest purpose OF this to cut on lcgisla
tion passed to meet and affect, favorably and
unflvorably. particular case
After an election has taken place any one who
desires and has Il standing TO contest Is entitled
to have The contest heard aud tried by that court
or Judge who would have tried II when the clec.
tion took place; to have moro nor any less
demand Of him in order 10 Institute the contest
than then required; and 10 have the same
course of procedure observed But in no sense
can the disposition OF the costs he regarded as a
regulation "ot the manner Of trial. or "the eN.
CrCise of jurisdiction" cognatc expressions which
We find IN two parts Of the clause quoted. The
only complaint that can be made against a
change in respect to disposition OF the costs,
such is now before us, il that the parties
may be called upon to assume Larger response
bllty for them than they perhaps contemplated,
the law imposed when the proceedings were
begun. They now have an absolute liability II
they tail, where before they could possibly shift
IL il the court decided that the contest was sus.
tanned by probable cause. But whether the
change in the law has added to their burdens or
not the disposition of the costs in all cases Is so
at the pleasure OF the legislature that we are not
TO restrict it except. Shcrc by express prohibi'
tion or clear duplication we are compelled to do
So neither of which can he said of what is to be
found here.
The rule to show cause why the city Of scran.
ton should not pay the costs Is discharged and
the costs are directed TO be paid 10y the petition
prs.
THE SIGNERs.
The following are the men who will
have to pay the costs of tn" contest,
they having signed Walsh's petition:
Fred Hafner Wilburet Klein, John
McNamee, Thos. Burns, Thos. Man
MON, Joseph OHora. Abraham Gets,
Edward j. Halligan, William Shaugh-
messy, John w. Brown. Frank Schoul2.
John Mcdonald, j. j. Shaughnessy. jrr
Patrick Shaughnessy, John Canning,
Jacob Such. Joseph Kraynick, August
Brown, Andreas Schultz, George
Schultz, Benjamin Klein. Frederick
Hafner, George Sepelyok. Frank Weis-
berger, AL Towpowch, Jacob Jurkowitz,
Joseph Schwar e. Fl. Sc'mu onitz, Tony
Schumlovitz. Harry Davis, Sam
Friedman. sam Yurkowitz, II. Surko-
witz. NJ. Schwartz, NJ. Benwitz. John
Coat John Harman, Edward German.
Thomas was returned as having re-
ceived 219 votes and the contest de-
cidei that 2S Illegal votes had been
cast for him, leaving him total of
19l. For Walsh PA votes were cast
and the contest took 81 of these from
him as illegal, leaving him with only
lS2 or four worse off than he was be-
fore the contest.
A member of the Legislature from
this county has been asked by signcrs
of the Langstaff contest petition to in
troduce a bill in the Legislature that
would have the effect of saving them
from the payment of costs in the event
of the contest going against them,
which seems likely. but he refused to
have anything to do with it, saying
it would be political suicide for man
to take such step.