Coeur d'Alene evening press. (Coeur d'Alene, Idaho) 1907-1929, 1908-10-22
ALLOT LEGALITY
IS UNSETTLED
Inmittee Not Satisfied With Form
as Fixed by Auditor.

unless Auditor Quarles should
change his position as to the form
OF ballot to be used in the county
seat election it is certain that this
matter will have to go to the dis
trict court for adjudication before
the county seat removal committee
can feel certain as to whether they
are proceeding in accordance with
the law on the subpct or not.
The first question that arose, and
which was presented to the court for
decision, was as to whether the
correct ballot to be used was the
form under the law of 1899 or 1905.
Auditor Quarles at that time had sub
mitted to the printer the ballot pro-
vided for under the law of 1899.
The ballot contained the question
of the removal of the county seat,
and was followed with the words
mo" and ''yes," and after each was
circle. Mandamus proceedings
were than instituted for the purpose
of deciding as to which law the bal
lot was to be printed under, and
sample of the ballot was attached
to the petition. A demurrer was in
terposed to the petition, but it was
overruled, and the contention of the
prosecuting attorney is that in over
ruling the demurrer to the petition
the supreme court sustained the pc
tition as whole including the at
tached sample ballot. The court,
however, it seems was asked to pass
on the question as to whether a cir
Gle should follow the words, mo"
and Eyes" but declined to do so
owing to the fact that 1t was not
question submitted to them for ad-
Indication, and Auditor Quarles now
takes the position that the circles
should not be used under the law of
1899, and this morning directed the
printer to print the ballots without
them. The ballot submitted by him
now contains the county seat removal
question. and it is followed by the
words, no" and YES" but no cir
cles. The prosecuting attorney
stated this afternoon that he dis
cussed the matter with him this
morning, but that he declined to
have the circles placed on the bal
lot. and also stated that he would
not be guided by his written opinion
on the matter. The prosecuting at
torney, however, submitted his writ
ten opinion of the matter, and un-
less the auditor changes his position,
in the judgment of the prosecuting
attorney it viii be necessary for a
test case to be made before the
district court.
The proceedings will be brought
in the district court instead of the
supreme court owing to the fact that
the time is too limited to bring 1t
before the supreme court.
The prosecuting attorneys opin-
ion is as follows:
ct. L. Quarles, Auditor, Rathdrum,
Idaho.
Dear Sir:--In regard to the form
and contents of the county seat bal
lot, wish to advise you that in
my opinion the form you first sub
mitted to the printer is the proper
one under the election laws of this
state, and that the form you sub
mited yesterday (Oct. 21st) il
neither proper under the law. nor
fair to the electors. A ballot should
be prepared SO that an elector may
vote his choice intelligently, and
voting should be made as
simple as possible undel
the statutes, and not difficult
II there is a close question as e
which on of two possible forms under
the law is proper, that one should
be selected which is the most simple
and which viii enable the eleetor &c
express his choice on the PROPOSE
ton submitted without confusion, a
the intent OF the voter is what gov
ems II 1t can be determined from
the face OF the ballot.
ut was my opinion that the bal
; lot you first submitted was correct
and that opinion is more fixed nov
under the decision Of the suprem'
court of this state in Whitla versul
: ouarles. auditor. in which case boti
ballots we're set out in the petition
J for the writ OF mandate. and tn
) eral relief was prayed for. and tn