Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1904-10-05
NO REMEDY BY MANDAMUS,
40 Action, II Malnlainable at ALL
Lies ia Equity Unless legislature
Has Provided Otherwise,
THE PRESENT CONTROVERSY
Comes Clearly Within Second Clause
Of Section IS Of the State Statute
Duty Of Secretary OF State.

Madison, Wis, oct, 5-~The supreme
court today decided the La Toilette
ticket regular Three Judges, Mar
shall Dodge and winslow, we're Tor tn
la Toilette faction. while CHIEF jus.
tice Cassidy dIssented. The opinion
VIII be filed later by Justice Marshall
After setting forth the facts alleged
IN the complaint ana In the answer fled,
the decision continues
THE controversy shown 10 exist by
the foregoing sufficiently concerns the
prerogatiyes of the state and affects
the liberties Of the people to be within
the original jurisdiction Of this court.
2.-such controversy Is Of so grave
character aud Of such public import.
ance as TO warrant this court in exer-
clslng IT'S original jurisdiction 10 de.
lermlne the right Of matter, so lar as
the door ls open for d 10 do.
8.-Since the question presented mere
~ involves the duty OF the secretary
of state Ia the performance OF an act
expressly cniolned by law, Il Is a ju-
dlclal one.
A--For the present case. the time not
having arrived when the secretary OF
state Is required TO make certlacatlOu
OF nominations, by the general rule
there is no remedy az law by manda-
mus hence action, II maintanable at
all, Is properly brought i'm equity, II the
legislature has not furnished another
aud exclusive remedy
5.-The legislature Intended 10 pro-
vide for settlement out OF court All
Questions between factions OF party
concerning right TO place the party
named upon the official ballot. by sec
tion 49, Wisconsin statutes. In these
words.
Ain case OF division IN any p0.
lliical party and claim by two or
more factions thereof 10 the same party
name, the office with whom the Ger.
tiilcates Of nomination are required 10
be fled shall, In certifying such noml-
nation on preparing ballots. give pref
erence Of name 10 the convention or
caucus thereof held pursuant to the call
of The regularly constituted party au-
thoritles, and II the committee repre-
senting the other faction present no
other party name, such Office may des-
ignate the name In such manner as will
best distinguish the nominations there.
Of
When two or more conventions
or caucuses shall be held, and the NOM
nations thereof certified, each claim
ing TO be the regular convention or
caucus of the same political party. pref
erence In designation shall be- given
10 the nominations Of the one certified
by the committee which had been Off
cially certified TO be authorized ~ rep.
resent the party"
1.-THE first clause provides for
ease where only one OF two on more
conventions Is claimed 10 have been
held upon the call OF the regular party
committee and the Identity Of that one
is. therefore, not in doubt The second
clause provides for case whore all OF
the conventions are claimed 10 have
been held pursuant 10 the call OF such
AM the same committee By creating "A
tribunal to decide for guidance for the
secretary OF state which set OF nominn-
nces Is regular, and therefore entitled
10 use Of the party name, such tribu-
nal possessing by familiar rules exclu.
slve and final jurisdiction, save az here
after stated.
THE first clause Of section Is. sta
tutes Of 1898, cannot apply to this case.
because the dominant feature thereof
IS the existence Of a multlfarious "claim
10 the same party name" determlnable
as before indicated by the certifying Of
tlcer from his own records, showing the
necessary source OF regularity.
S,--Whlle the dominant feature of
such flrst clause Is the existence ~ n
multifarlous ''claim 20 the same party
name" one Of such claims only being
based on the "oall OF the regularly con-
siituted party authorities" the doml-
nant feature Of the second clause is
the existence OF multifarious claim
to the same party name" based on n
like claim ~ the regularity OF the
party convention each OF the claimants
referring necessarily 70 the ''call OF the
regularly constituted party authorl.
ties az IN the case IN hand,
s--rhe present controversy Gomez
clearly within the second clause Of said
section 30, answering as II does every
call thereof:
(A)-Two conventions we're held.
(B)-.Each Of said conventions made
nominations.
(c)-such nominations were duly
certified.
(D.)-Each OF said conventions claim
ed 70 be the regular convention Of the
Republican party.
1O.-lt was competent for the legisla-
ture IN authorization OF official ballo,
and in granting TO the party nominees
right 10 have their names placed
thereon under the party designation. 10
subject thar right In case OF controyet-
~ between two or more sets OF noml-
nets. each claiming the same and such
10 the decision OF the party
tribunal as IN said section 30.
1.-THE creation OF tribunal 70 de-
termlne such controversies. no provi-
slons being made for judicial review os
its decisions. necessarily makes lts fur
exclusive and It's decisions un.
impeochable except 'or iurlsdctlona
defects.
i2.-The tribunal answering 10 he
call of said section 81. IN found 10 eX-
ist In the Republican state central com
mittee elected az the state convention
OF 1902. and duly certified 10 the secre-
tary OF state under section 81 OF tho
statutes. therefore. Jurisdiction " this
court Is limited 10 deciding whether
such committee was or Is without jur-
isdictlon because % bias or interest %
some Of its members or whether rs de-.
cislon is affected by hrisdlctionai de-
fects
t3.-such tribunal. though REQUIRED IN
act judlcially, being an administrative