The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1903-10-16

The Meesrs. Roses want their names or
of state has declared he will put Senator
Champlins name on the ballot as the
Democratic candidate for senator and the
name OF w. Tai Dodge as the Democratic
candidate for representative from the
town. Many prominent lawyers and poll
The anti-Champlin caucus was the one
first held.
THE CASE OPENED.
Mr.. Gardner read the petition to Chief
Justice Stiness and Justices Tfllinghast
and Douglas and then said there was q
demurrer to the effect that the petition
ers had no such special interest In the
matter Of the petition that the court could
grant the writ.
The court decided that It would hear the
demurrer first, though counsel for Mr..
Bennett wanted to have his answer to the
petition read.
Mr.. Stsarns then cited the Pawtucket
case of O'Brien VS.. board OF aldermen.
that a private party could not successful
ly urge his right 10 have his name put
on the ballot. Mr.. Stearns continued TO
argue that the attorney general alone
had the right TO bring such a proceeding.
THE COURTS SETTLEMENT.
The court believed a candidate had GER
tain rights in such q case and said 1t was
very evident the attorney general was
on the other side from the petitioners.
Judge Douglas said tho petition itself
stated the excuse for not bringing the
petition In the name OF the state.
Mr.. Stearns said when the petition was
presented to him, he replied. You want
me To apply for writ against the SEQ
retary of state. yet by law / am required
TO defend him in all euits arising from
his official acts" He thereupon claimed
the writ could not be applied for unless
the attorney general wished TO apply for
IL.
Mr. Gardner said that there was a spe-
cial, peculiar and personal right on the
part of either petitioner 20 have the relief
sought. II argued Mr.. Gardner. the posi-
uon OF the attorney general is correct,
and IL seems logical that no writ can
ever be obtained against the secretary OF
state TO compel him to perform any duty
whatsoever. Tho attorney general as
counsel. could not prosecute his client.
MT; Stearns said that if private citizens
could bring this writ there would be a
thousand applications for such writs, as
ell II would be necessary to DO would be
TO ask the attorney general WHO is coun-
commissioners in the state.
CHIEF JUSTICE INTERVIEWS.
Chief Justice Stiness then said that in
making the attorney general counsel for
about all the officers and commissio
In the state IL had relieved him OF his
judicial duties.
Attorney General Stearns argued he
was only counsel for officers and COM
missions when asked TO be such. He
thought the distinction important
The court did not and over-ru,ed the
demurrer IL seemed to the court that
all relief by mandamus will be denied II
the matter was soley In the discretion OF
the attorney general
Mr. Gardner then read the answer,
which set up the fact OF two oaucuses
being held in the town under the name
OF Democratic. one being called by the
committee appointed by the executive
committee Of the Democratic state cen
tral committee and the other by a town
committee called and claiming 20 be Dem
ocratic.
The secretary Of state also declared in
his answer that the Champhn nomination
was first received ana in proper form and
asked the petition be dismissed. Mr.. Ben
nett declared that the same candidates
had nominations filed as Republicans
Mr. Gardner declared the question was
as 20 how the court would go I'm recog-
mixing party machinery. He maintained
that n would be shown that the suthorf-
tie. held the courts bound 20 recognize
such machinery.
While Mr.. Gardner was stating his case
and referring to the action Of the Demo-