Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1904-10-12
COURT UPHOLDS
LA TOILETTE TICKET.
Action of State Central Committee
of 1902 Is Unimpeachable and
Beyond Dispute.
NO ROOM LEFT FOR COURTS
Decision of National Committee Not Sig
nifcant in a State Case Provided
II for by Law.
NO ROOM LEFT FOR COURTS

Madison, Wis, Oct. 5.-The supreme
court today decided that the La Toilette
ticket is regular. Three judges, Mar
shall, Dodge and Winslow, were for the
La Toilette faction, while Chief Justice
Cassoday dissents. The opinion will be
6led later, by Justice Marshall.
After setting forth the facts alleged
In the complaint in answer filed, the de-
cision continues:
DECISION.
l. Controversy shown to exist by the
foregoing sufficiently concerns the preroga.
tives Of tho state and affects the liberties
Of the people, to be within the original
Jurisdiction of this court.
2. Such controversy is Of so grave char
acter, and of such public Importance, as to
jurisdiction to determine the right of the
matter, SO far as the door is open for it to
10 so.
3. Since the question presented merely
In the performance Of an act expressly en-
Joined by law, it is judicial one.
4. For the present case, the time not
having arrived when the secretary of state
Is required to make certifcation of nOmina
lions, by general rule, there is no remedy at
law by mandamus; hence, action if main
talnable at all, Is properly brought III
equity, if the Legislature has not furnished
another and exclusive remedy.
The Law in the Case.
5. The Legislature intended to provide
for settlement, out of court, of ali ques-
ions between factions of a party concern,
Ing the right to the party name upon of
fetal ballot, by section 30, Wisconsin
statutes, in these words:
''(A). In case of decision in any political
party and a claim by two more factions
officer with whom the certificate of
nomination are required to be filed
sha1 In nY.%i Tx-f
preparing ballots, give preference of name
to the convention or caucus thereof held
pursuant to the call of the regularly con-
stftuted party authorities, and if the com
mittee representing the other faction pre-
sent another party name such officer may
designate the same in such manner as will
best distinguish the nominations thereof.
''(B). When two or more conventions or
caucuses shall be held and the nominations
thereof certified, each claiming to be the
regular convention or caucus of the same
political party, preference in designation
shall be given to the nominations of the
one CERTIFIED BY THE COMMITTEE
Titled TO BE AUTHORIZED TO REP
RESENT THE PARTY"
6. The first clause provides for a case
where only one or two or more conventions
Is claimed to have been held upon call of
regular party committee and the identity OF
that one is therefore, not in doubt. The
second clause provides for a case where all
of conventions are claimed to have been
held pursuant to the call Of such and the
same committee, by creating a tribunal to
decide for the guidance for the secretary of
state which set of nominees is regular, and
therefore entitled to the use OF the party
name, such tribunal possessing by familiar
rules exclusive and final juriSdiStiOn, save
as hereafter stated.
Z. The first clause of section So, statutes
1898, cannot apply to this case, because the
dominant feature thereof is existence of a
multifarious CLAIM 10 THE SAME
PARTY NAME" determinable as before in
dicated by the certifying officer from his
own records, showing the necessary source
Of regularity.
s. While the dominant feature of such
first clause is the existence of a multifarious
"CLAIM TO THE SAME PARTY NAME
one of such claims only being based on the
CALL OF THE REGULARLY CONSTI-
TUTED PARTY AUTHORITIES" the
dominant feature of the second clause IS
the existence of a multifarious CLAIM TO
THE SAME PARTY NAME based on a
like claim to the regularity of the party
convention, each Of the claimants referring
necessarily to the CALL OF THE REGU-