The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1906-10-27
HEARST men OFF The TICKET.
APPELLATE COURT BANDS DOWN
A SWEEPING DECISION.
Petitions by which II was sought 90 NOHiio
nate for Three OHlccs at once Held 10
ne Bad-The Few who win 60 Under
the Scales Almost All Tammany Men.

nate for Three Omccs At Once Held 20
ne had The Few Who VIII Go Under
the scales Almost All Tammany Men. ,
By q sweeping decision handed down
yesterday afternoon the Appellate Division
OF the Supreme Court knocked out almost
10 per cent. Of the local ticket Of the In
dependence League. The ruling OF the
Appellate Division will come before a special
session of the Court Of Appeals on Monday
or Tuesday and II it IL upheld the emblem
of the scales will head a ticket which, save
for the State and Judiciary candidates;
gill be practically blank.
The Hearst lawyers and candidates wers
first furious and then disheartened at the
blow administered to their ticket, but lateri
as they recovered wind, they asserted
that the courts decision would have a
boomerang effect, and that thousands OF
men who were not going to vote for Hearst
and his candidates would do so now, 70
indicate their protest against the dificultiea
which confront an independent State party.
The Republican lawyers and candidates.
VINO WE'RE dnAlOl7tl dNhANAl ~ NSNiNNs
were overioyed at the ruling of the court'
while the Tammany men looked on in com-
parative Indifference.
The flaw found by the Justices Of the
Appellate Division in the Independence
League nominations lies in the petitions
which the law prescribes must be Med
to entitle an independent candidate to
have his name on the ballot. This petition
must be signed by a prescribed number
Of voters residing in the district in which
the candidate in running for office A
petition for a candidst e for Assembly must
have at least 500 such signatures, while
that for o Congressional candidate needs
1000.
The Ieaguers evolved the scheme OF
heading the petitions with the names OF
. the candidates for Assembly, Senate snd
Congress and then gathering in each As
sembly district the signatures needed. In
this way the petitions showed that the
signers approved OF the independent nomi-
nation under the league emblem OF the
three candidates, and as there are several
Assembly districts in each Congressional
district and more than one in a Senatorial
district the collected petitions had more
than the necessary number for Senator and
Representative.
Many Tammany candidates for thess
local Offices who were Endorsed by the
Independence League gathered their petit
lions in this way, all Of them. in fact, except
FIVE. When these petitions we're filed with
the Board Of Elections objections to them
we're filed by the Republican. candidates
through Lawyer a. S:3r0eFt ~ tfs ftepub--
lican law committee. Mr.. Gilbert argued
that the law required a separate petition
for every individual candidate and that
the composite OF multiple petitions, 40
those filed for independent nominations
we're called, we're illegal.
Mr.. Gilbert's objections were thrown
out by the Board of Elections, and the
Supreme Court affirmed the boards action
without going into the merits OF the cases
presented, 20 that an appeal might be taken
at once. The appeal was argued in the
Appellate Division on Thursday, before
Presiding Justice O'Brien, and Justices
Clarke, Ingraham, Laughlin and Scott. and
they sat nearly all night and all yesterday
going over the records in each case and
arriving at decisions.
Summed up, the Courts opinion ia that
not only are all multiple petitions void for
the candidates whose districts are not
limited by that of the Assembly nominee.
but that the petition cannot be made use OF
at all. Hence, every such petition is thrown
out altogether, and az it is now too late to
file new petitions or ill vacancies, practi-
cally every Independent League candidate
for the Senate, for Assembly and for Con-
gress is left without a nominating petition,
and, therefore, his name cannot appear on
the ballot.
There we're more than seventy such nomi-
nations affected by the decision.
A few escaped the decision, but in the con-
fusion into which the Tnde pendence League
lawyers were thrown by the suddenness Of
the blow it was almost impossible to find out
the names of all the survivors II is known,
however, hat on the indie pendence League
ticket will ppear the names of Charles 4.
Shober, whose Congressional district In
Queens runs over to Manhattan, and who
got up a separate petition at the last moment;
William A.. De Ford, Senatorial candidate
for the Twenty-frst district N secretary
Of the Independence League State COM
mittee, against whose petitions nc objeo-
tions were filed; Francis Burton Harrison,
who got up a separate petition for the lnde-
pendence League Endorsement OF his can
didacy, he being a regular Tammany nomi-
nee for Congress in the Sixteenth dis
! tTlCls htlu htIlS u EIaW 10y iC AhAAitAlhny
header. who seems to have had WING Of the
possible laws in his petition, and who beat
the Directors right under the wire.
The following names will also remain on
the Independence League ticket because
no objections were made to their petitions:
John T. Mccall, candidate for senate in the
Sixteenth district: r. F. Wagner, for Assem-
bly, in the Twenty-second; W. II, Burns. for
Assembly in the Fourth; PhilipT. Schmidt
for Assembly in the Thirty third. and j. J.
Hoey, for Assembly in the Thirteenth.
The decision 81 the Court was rendered
in the case Of Francis f. Shober, the Tam
many-Hearst candidate in the Seven
tenth Congressional district. William s.
Bennett ia the Republican candidate for the
anne office, and through Lawyer Gilbert
he objected to the Shober petition for the
Independence League nomination. The
ruling in the Shober case governs all the
other cases where similar objections were
made to the petitions-namely, that more
than one candidates name could not appear
- Aasa.-