Arizona republican., 1909-10-10
SEGREGATION
LAW STANDS
Judge Kent Decides Tempe
Case
WILL OF THE LEGISLATURE.
Not Sufficiently Vague AS
to Warrant Its Neglect
Supervisors Compelled
Under Another Statute to
Establish Polling Places

Judge Kent decided yesterday morn
ing that supervisors must carry out
the segregation law of the last legis-
lature in local option elections. Though
the law was not quite as clear as it
should be there could be no doubt of
the meaning of the legislators.
The decision was rendered in the
case of Al a. Gibson aga INST the board
of supervisors in the matter Of pro-
posed local option election in Tempe
precinct. The petition for the election
disregarded the segregation feature of
the law and prayed for an election to
be held in the Justices precinct.
The Royal Arch which had put Glib
son forward, asked that two polling
places be established, one for the in
corporated town and the other for that
part of the precinct which lies out
side the corporation.
The supervisors were inclined to
grant the former petition on the
ground that the local option law of
which the so-called segregation law
is an amendment leaves il discretion
airy with the board to establish voting
precincts for such elections. In this
respect. the law as it now stands, is
contradictory. Gibson then began a
mandamus suit against the board to
compel the establishment OF two pre-
cincts.
1t is held by Judge Kent that the
board is to be ruled by the more gen.
eral law relating TO election precincts,
requiring the board to establish con
venient" precincts
l. I'll.
The legislature at its last session
passed an act commonly known as the
segregation act, which in effect pro-
vides for a separate counting of bal
lots in an incorporated town or village
from the ballots cast in the precinct
in which such town or village may be
situated. at a local option election. A
petition having been filed by certain
inhabitants of Tempe justice precinct
which is a precinct including in its
boundaries an incorporated town. for
holding a local option election in such
precinct. the board of supervisors an
nounced their determination to declare
and define only one election precinct
for such local option election.
An application was made by Glib
son for a writ of mandamus against
the board of supervisors to compel
them to establish at least two election
precincts within the Tempe justice pre-
cinct: that application is resisted by
the board of supervisors on the ground
that they are not compelled. as a mat
ter of law. TO provide for more than
one election precinct within the justice
precinct
The question arises as to the
power of the court b. mandamus to
compel the board of supervisors to de-
precincts within the justice precinct.
The action Of the board of supervisors
if valid. and if it cannot be changed
by the court in this proceeding, in
effect nullifies the action of the legis-
lature in the segregation law
"Of course it is the duty of the
court wherever possible to see that the
will of the Legislators as expressed by
them in their enactments is carried
out. and the question Of the advisable
ity or n-advisability of the law is
not a question for the court There
was no machinery provided in the
amendment to the local option law
passed by the legislature, known as
the segregation act, for casting the
ballots inside the Incorporated town or
outside Of it, and resort must be had
to the general law on the subject to
ascertain the power of the court. Para
graph 973 of the Revised Statutes, de-
filming the duty of the board of super