The interior journal. [volume] (Stanford, Ky.) 1905-1910, 1909-07-02

Il AtoAt atlu ufilut WIN HUhlt w 'HtiNtth
to the nomination. The proceedings in
such cases shall be in such form and
manner as the committee or governing
authority shall determine upon"
II Is conceded by the parties to this
litigation that the only question to be
determined upon this appeal is whether
or not the Committee heard and deter
mined the contest between Mason and
Dougherty. IL is also conceded that
the courts have no power to correct the
decision Of the Committee in such a
matter, however erroneous II may be.
The only power which the courts have
is TO force the Committee TO decide.
but they can not review their decision.
The case Of Beasley vs.. Adams. lls KY.
695, for all practical purposes involv.
ed the questions we have here.
In the opinion, after quoting from sec
ton 1858. Ky. Statutes. the following:
I'm all cases Of tie vote or contest,
the committee or governing authority
Of the political party holding such pri-
mary election, shall have the power to
hear and determine such contest and
decide who shall be entitled to the nom
ination. The proceedings in such cases
shall be in such form and manner as
the committee or governing power
shall determine upon. We said:
This makes the decision Of the con-
test committee final. The language
that the committee shall have the
power to hear and determine such con-
tests. and decide who shall be entitled
to the nomination. precludes the idea
that there shall be an appeal. The en-
tire matter is referred to the governing
authority Of the party for its decision.
and this is eminently proper. as the
question is purely political. This con-
struction is consonant with sound
reason. and any other would violate the
elementary canon of statutory construc-
ton that the law should not be so IN
terpreted as to make II vain or illusory.
Primary elections are held for the pur-
pose Of nominating party candidates
for the regular State election there
after to be held for the selection by the
whole people of their official servants.
The right of political parties TO so
select their nominees has been deemed
sufficiently important TO safeguard the
official machinery by which the elections
are held with the protection Of the law;
but IL where there are contests over the
nominations. the defeated candidates
may appeal to the courts. it would
necessarily follow that the State cleo
ton would be held before the contest
could be settled. and the political party
whose nominees were thus involved in
litigation would have no place on the
ticket for the offices in question, and
the statute rendered abortive. And
again:
"In the case at bar the governing
authority Of the party has acted upon
the sufiiciency of appellants grounds of
contest, and rendered a decision adj
verse to him. This judgment can not
be reviewed by US. Courts will often
require officials to act in matters, the
decision Of which is exclusively within
their discretion. when they refuse to do
so. although they will not review the
decision when made. however errone-
Gus it may be.
Applying the principles thus enunciat.
ed. we have no difficulty in reaching the
conclusion that the Committee heard
and determined the matter of contest
between the rival candidates. In the
notice of contest several grounds were
relied upon by the contestant: these
were all dismissed by the Committee.
except that one which alleges that the
contestant in reality received more
votes than the contestee. Whether
this decision was right or wrong it is
not within our province to determine.
Ii was within the jurisdiction of the
Committee to pass upon the sufiiciency
Of the grounds of contest, and their de-
cision. that certain grounds relied upon
were insufficient. was in principle the
same as il demurrer had been filed to
these grounds and sustained by the
Committee. This decision left only one
question to be determined; Which of
the two candidates received the great
err number Of legal votes? As to this
ground the contestant seems to have
relied in the main upon his right to a
recount Of the ballots in the boxes
which had been preserved. and, SO far
as this record shows to the contrary,
had not been tempered with in any
way. The contestee objected to re-
count Of the ballots. and relied upon a
rule of the Democratic party. formulat-
ed at its last convention, which author
lied a recount Of the ballots provided
II .Ls. Il .aouaota al hu tan mar cant 81 tho