Albuquerque evening herald. [volume] (Albuquerque, New Mexico) 1911-1914, 1911-10-31
REMARKABLE RULING.
Continued from Page one)

said board County commissioners
three days before the meeting of such
board for such purpose. q list az the
names of such election Judges as they
may desire appointed in each pre-
cinct, Ia such county. which said list
shall contain az least the names of
three qualified electors IN each pre-
clnct for each OF the Judges To- he
appointed. from the list so filed the
board OF county commissioners shall
have the right and u shall be It's
duty TO select the election Judges for
each OF said precincts. ,.. and no
more than two OF said Judges shall
belong to the same political party
unless such county chairman repre-
snting the other political party
should fail or refuse 10 submit list
OF nam's from which the Judge IN
any precinct could be- selected"
Al the end OF the section tho fol-
lowing provision Is added, III the
chairman OF any political party as
herein provided should fail or refuse
90 submit the list OF names as horo-
In provided for. the board OF county
commissioners shall select any quail
fled olector OF such precinct as Judge
or judges OF election"
Under the law az II existed prior
10 the above statute tho sole power
81 choosing Judges OF election was
vested In the board OF county conn
niissioners and they were permitted
10 choose any one they saw III, with
out regard TO party
In continuing his argument after
the Herald went Go press last night.
MIR Wood commended on behalf of the
Republican party that In constituting
the statute tho court must take into
confederation the purpose intended 90
be accomplished by the legislature.
which was To change the old rule 50
as 70 place the power OF selecting
judges within the control OF the coun-
~ chairmen of the swo dominant po-
iitical parties instead OF the board OF
county commissioners. where IL had
formerly beon. and giving 20 the MI
nority party In each county the abs
solute right. II IL saw ~ 90 ask for
g. TO be represented on the board OF
election Judges. but In order that tho
board OF county commissioners
should hayo some choice among the
persons proposed. Il was required that
oach party II Il saw III to demand
representation must propose three
names for each Judge 10 be selected
from that party. 80 that the county
commissioners might take any one
out OF the three, but that II tho nil
nority party did not see III TO de-
snand this representation ON the
board Il was then the duty OF the
county commissioners Go select she
three Judges from those nominated
by the majority party, provided II
proposed enough SO that they could
have three mon from whom to select
each Judge
He further contcnded that II the
minority party saw fif TO recognise
the fact that II was entitled to only
oBo Judge. that then II need only
submit three Enmes for each pre-
cinct. but in that event the board
could only select one from the three
~ proposed.
The arguments we're finally con-
cluded about five o'clock and Judge
Abbott stated that owing 20 the fact
that that was the last day and that
no had no time % give tho matter ca
tended consideration II was necessary
FOR him 10 decide Il at once and he
proceeded Go announce his conelus-
Ions on the points involved. He ilrst
held that the two dominant parties
Ia this county must be taken 20 mean
the regular Republican and the reg
ular Democratic PARTIES and that the
SO called progressive Republican party
had no right 90 submlt a list or to
/, demand any OF tho election jHdges.
lie next held that the county chair
men in submitting their proposed lists
tor judges ~ election were required
10 submit three nanee for each Judge
To be chosen and the Democrats In
submitting only three names la each
precinct were not complying with the
law. That tho provisions OF the statute
were not mere suegcstione but pos
| itiVe directions o. the county commits
sioners which could be enforced by "A
mandamua From these conclusions
u followed that The Democratic party
was not entitled 90 demand any cleo
lion Judge
lie stated that while the word any
was susceptible of being construed as
| every" ~ which event the last clause
would have been merely applicable 20
a case whore both parties failed "a
supply a list he ala not believe II
could be thn Intention Of the leeisla-
ture Go accomplish such a result whore
q party inadvertently or for some
other reason, had not complied with
tho law and thoroforo that this part
~ the section must he held 20 mean
that whore one % the two dominant
parties failed % hlo the llst that the
board OF county commissioners then
had a right 90 70 entirely outside Of
the list 10 select thh judges aiid that
therefore the court could not compel