Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1905-06-02
Injunction Proceedings Begun ON Pri-
mary Election Law.


As an evidence Of the interest felt In this
county in the injunction proceedings insti
tuted In the Circuit Court here recently by
Willis b Burdetts to restrain the Supervise
ore Of Elections for this county from hold
ing the approaching primary elections under
the provisions of the primary election law
passed ct the last session of the Legislature,
probably 800 representative Democrats and
republicans from ell sections Of the county
attended the hearing before Judges Hender-
son and Motter here on Tuesday last, Thos.
N. Talbot represented the Supervisors Of
Elections, and Thomas Dawson and Alexau"
der kilgour represented Mr.. Burdette The
case was not concluded, but after demurrer
TO the bill 6led in the case was overruled, 1t
was postponed for ten days to allow Mr.. Tai
bolt time in which to file his answer. Testi-
mony will then be taken to determine the
facts 10 the case.
The bill filed by Mr.. Burdett's attorneys
asks that the law be declared 'unconstitu-
tional, null and void, and declares that II
"opens wide the doors for fraud and cor
ruption, without providing any penalty for
the wrongdoer or redress for the injured. !"
Some OF the grounds upon which the injunc-
ton 10 asked are the following:
That the act was not passed In conformity
with the Constitution and laws Of the State
that the section providing for the expense Of
elections to be held under the law provided,
when 1t passed the General Assembly, that
each delegation to nominating convention
pay to the supervisors of elections the sum
OF $40, but when said bill was copied for
presentation to the Governor for his approval
or rejection II was "by accident or design,
or by the carelessness Of some employee of the
General Assembly, fraudulently, corruptly,
or negligently altered" so as to provide that
each delegate to nominating convention
pay to the supervisors Of elections the sum Of
$40; that the act is unintelligibls aud the
legislative intent impossible TO be understood
or inferred, aside from the ''Obvious scheme
therein disclosed to give the managers Of the
elections contemplated to be held hereunder
q legal device to perpetrate fraud upon the
electorate and to force and compel fraudn lent
and dishonest results, regardless Of the will
OF the majority" that the act contains no
provision for count Of the ballots that no
officer 10 charged with the custody Of the
ballots after the polls close that there is no
penalty for destroying the ballots or for
substituting different boxes with fraudulent
ballots
The complaint also alleges that when the
bill passed the General Assembly It provided
that all persons physically disqualified could
receive assistance In marking their ballots,
but when 1t was presented to the Governor
for his approval II contained the added words
"or for any reason" meaning that any one
cosld receive assistance for the asking This
change, the bill alleges, opens the door for
fraud and corruption,
II 10 further alleged that the act requires
each delegate to q convention to deposit with
the Supervisors OF Elections fifteen days be-
fore the election the sum of $40. This 10
characterized as an absurdity, 1t being ex-
planned that there could be no delegates until
chosen on election day, consequently they
could not make the deposit fifteen days be-
fore
At the hearing here Tuesday, counsel for
the Super visors Of Elections demurred to the
bill filed In the case on the ground that the
changes alleged TO have been made between
the time 1t passed the General Assembly and
It's presen tatiOn to the Governor for his ap-
proval or rejection were immaterial, and that
the court should strike out these changes
without aunulling the entire sections In
which they appear. The attorneys for Mr..
Burdette held that the entire sections 10
which changes had been made should be
stricken out, and the whole law thus rendered
imperative. They also argued that the meas-
ure is unconstitutional.
In rendering the decision Of the court,
Judge Henderson stated that the demurrer
would be overruled for the reason that the
counsel for the Supervisors, for the purposes
Of this demurrer, had admitted the alIega-
lions Of the bill, but that the constitution
ality Of the law would not be considered at
this time. The court then announced that a
postponement would be taken TO enable Mr..
Talbot to prepare and file his answer, when
the testimony would be taken.
Among those summoned to testify in the
case are Spencer q. Jones, President of the
Maryland Senate; Albert J. Almoney, Read
ing Clerk Of that body; John W. Williams,
Walter A. Johnston, DR.. b. F. Lansdale, e.
L. Amiss, members Of the House Of Dele
gates R. @. Hilton, Clerk to the County
COMM sioners; ChieE-Clerk Smith, Of the
engrossing room