The pioneer express. [volume] (Pembina, Dakota [N.D.]) 1883-1928, 1911-08-25

PEMBINA COUNTY. MORT
alton was July 18th and the election
was November 9Th.
COURT SAYS s'No LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
FROM JULY TO NOVEMBER"
The court erred in stating'as facts,
that the sufi:iency Of the petition
stands uncha1lenged and unquestioned.
Appellants made no charge from July
18th. to Nov 9th. Prior to election the
findings Of the board were not attacked
nor does the appellant question the
sufficiency of the petition.
The appellants brief contains many
pages directly challenging the suficiency
of the petition and argues that athe
petition, the order, and the ballot used
were each and all absolutely void, and
that the petition does not conform to the
statute.
The statement of the court that no
attack was made from July to November
is wholly incorrect. As soon as reason
ably convenient after the arbitrary acts
of the county board, on September 9TH,
papers were presented to the supreme
ourt>asking thei- adjudication on the
propositions stated in the preceding
paragraph, that the proceedings OF the
board were void. Tho decision itself in
later pages discusses this case after
thus previously stating that Pembina
did nothing. ~.
TWO KINDS OF LAW
The court erred in constituting the
North Dakota statute "a restrictive
instead of an open vo,e.
(Tbere are two kinds of statutes in
ditfrent states referring to the removal
or relocation of county seats One kind
limits the choice of the voter to one
place other than the present location.
Tue other kind'of statute allows the
voter TO vo.e for the place III the coun-
ty which he prefers" which latter is the
language of the North Dakota statute.
The election in this county was held rs
though the provisions Of the statute re-.
stricted the voter 10 voting for one place
only. The petition, the commissioners
order and the ballot all called for Cava
lier only. The name of Pembina, while
on the ballot, did not answer the .ques.
tion printed on the ballot. and it is only
by inference that the question is answer-
ed.)
sTR1cTIvE. Law.
The decision of the supreme court ia
that the North Dakota statute is q re-
strictive Law.
(Thes objections and assignments Of
errors on this subject by the attorneys
for Pembina Citgare very many and the
arguments and authorities cited take yp
about sixty pages anu we can refer tc
them very brieay.) 4
ERRORS OF COURT IN CONSTRUCTION OF
NORTH DAKOTA STATUTE AS A RESTRICT
I'VE STATUTE 1NsrEAD OF AN OPEN BALLOT
STATUTE;
That the previous North Dakota Law
was not for restrictive ballot and is 90
acknowledged by the court Ia it's dec,s-
ion. That the North Dakota code
commissioners were directed not 70
change the laws, and that the court has
disregarded this 10 their construction.
l6 STATES HAVE RESTRICTIVE LAWS.
Sixteen states are listed by the court
and attorneys Is having restrictive laws.
In each OF these there are words to the
effect that the place to which the coun.
ty seat is 70 be moved must be named 10
the petition, Is follows; Minnesota,
'.county seat to be changed TO (here
name the place)-S. Oak, specify ing
the place to which it is to be changed, =
Mich. Ito propose place. Ind. .de-
signated the place" Va. srhe place
or places to be named in the petition" So
Iowa, petition shall designate tho
place" Wis. some other place de-
signed Wash. .Petition to set forth
name OF place. Kan. Petition and vote
on place to be designated" Kentucky,
'.the place named 10 the petition"
Maine, .plaos where they purpose 70
ltH.at. it,-Mias hillnt8 nrnvids.a vnta