The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1912-07-24
BACK TO COURT
Supreme Court VIII Again Face
T. r.. EIector Case.
Judge Branine Refused Perma-
nent Injunction.

With a determination to exhaust ev.
cry legal source of remedy in their eff.
fort to prevent the placing of the
names of the eight Roosevelt electoral
candidates on the primary ballots, the
Taft following in Kansas will take the
injunction suit against the los county
clerks of the state to the supreme
curt for final determination. In the
meantime and until the higher tribunal
finally passes on the case, Judge c. E.
Branine's restraining order is in opera
ton.
1t was when Judge Branine late yes
terday afternoon announced in Hutch
inson that he would dismiss the in.
junction suit and dissolve the restrain
ing order that the Taft forces showed
new fight and secured an order from
the court enforcing the restraining or
der until the final decision of the SUI
preme court. Allegations of additional
fraud and deception on the part Of the
Roosevelt electoral candidates will be
argued before the supreme court when
the case is called either Friday after
noon or Saturday morning.
In 13 of the 20 counties where Pc
tftions were circulated by the Roose-
welt electoral candidates, an exami-
nation and investigation of the sigma
lures was made. 1t is claimed that i'll
the petitions were inva1idated by aft
davits for withdrawal from the signers.
These names, it is claimed, constitute
a majority of all of the signatures Sc
cured in the 20 counties and leaves the
petitions far below the required per-
centage of names.
Records in the Hutchinson case VIII
probably reach Topeka tomorrow morn
ing. Immediately attorneys for the
Roosevelt electoral candidates will file
a motion in the supreme court asking
for the dismissal of the case. Then
the Taft forces will fight from the
standpoint of the law and facts.
Should the supreme court hold that
the Harvey county district court was
empowered with jurisdiction to try the
case, a new complication would arise:
1t would mean that the action would
be sent back to Judge Branine for
hearing on the merits. Regardless of
his decision, the case would still be
subject to a further appeal.
Reports that the pending litigation
is delaying the printing of the ballots,
is declared to be without any founda3
ton. The law is cited wherein it is
made plain that copy for the ballots
cannot be sent to the printer earlier
than July 81 and that if the action
were not in court. it would be impos-
sible for the printers to work on the
ballots at this time.
With their case now in the supreme
court on an entirely new issue than
that presented last Saturday, the Taft
lawyers propose to raise a federal con-
stitutional question involving the
rights of a citizen of a state, involving
either personal or property rights. On
their construction of the law, the petit
TONERS for the injunction declare that
the signers to the petitions have q
legal right to raise a cry of fraud at
this time and petition to keep the
Roosevelt supporters off the ballot.
I'VE will exhaust every legal remedy
at our disposal" said Fred E. Stanley,
national committeeman, land will fight
to allow the voters to cast their votes
for Taft if they so desire"
Whether this means that the case
will ultimately go to the supreme court
of the United States, is an issue that is
not discussed at this time. The case
may go there, or it may not. The Taft
supporters only declare they will con-
tinue to fight.