Evening capital news. (Boise, Idaho) 1901-1927, 1912-10-17
NORTH IDAHO
LAWYER ATTACKS
COURTS DECISION
Shows Inconsistencies in the
Ballot Case Wherein Pro-
gressives Were Taken OFF
I Ticket.

Attorneys Of the state, as shown by
the letter printed herewith, while they
condemn the decision of the supreme
court of the state as not representing
the law and as strained construction
put upon that law for the purpose of
preventing the filing of the Roosevelt
electoral ticket. do not feel that It
would be safe for them to criticize
the court for fear of the bias and
prejudice that may be created IN cases
presented by these attorneys before
the court
The following letter discusses the de-
cision at length from the point Of view
of a prominent attorney Of north Idaho
who points out many of the weak
nesses of the decision and some of its
Inconsistencies:
Evening Capital News: was in
terested in reading your editorial in the
News of Oct. IL, entitled, How Easy
1t Would Have Been and especially
the part where you suggested a sensi-
BILE construction for the words state
Office county office etc. by saying
that state office, within the meaning
of section 3s5 is an office to be voted
ipi ny citCtoIS VI tIlG "IOle Sldlc
requires 800 names, 'etc.
do you know that this is precisely
the construction p;aced upon those
same words by the supreme court of
Idaho, in the case of Phillips versus
Curtis. 4 Idaho, 1893? The part of the
opinion referring to the same being
found upon page 1917, and the opinion
was concurred in by Judge Sullivan.
ONE Of thn i,,I ,c he
preme court.
THE effect of the opinion in Phillips
versus Curtis is that the words state
county and district have no sig
nificance as referring to the inherent
nature of the office. but are simply
used to designate the voting area of
the candidate. Thus in that case
while they hold that in a general sense
a member Of the legislature is a state
officer, yet he is not such within the
meaning of the law, because he is only
voted for by the electors of county
In fact, the construction contained III
your editorial is precisely the con-
structiOn placed upon section 385 by
the supreme court in the state of Idaho,
in the case cited above, Judge Sui
hvan concurring.
Now, let me add another sug-
. gestion, which / think goes a long way
towards clearing up the law relative
to the nomination of candidates tyI
petition. Notice that the supreme
court fail in their opinion to refer to
section 3S2 of the revised codes, which
l think is the controlling section and
is the one under which the people have
the right to nominate presidential cleo
tors and members Of congress by pc
tition.
Notice how much broader the pro-
visions Of section 3s2 are than those
of 1856. Section 3S2 reads as follows:
"A convention or primary meeting
as hereinafter defined held for the
purpose of maxim nominations to pub
lie office and al.o electors to the num-
Der hereinafter specified may nomi-
nate candidates for public office to be
filled by election within the state And
the convention or primary meeting
within the meaning of this chapter is
an organized assembly OF electors or
directors representing a political party
or principle
Now you will note carefully the
reading of this provision because 1t is |
the one which confers the power to
nominate candidates for public office to
be filled by election within the state,
and was the only statute we had until
the enactment of the direct primary
law In 1909. The same power is con-
ferred In this statute upon both the
conventions and electors, in their own
particular way to make nominations
Nominations Of what? Candidates for
public office to be filled by election
within the state. The same power Is
conferred upon both. namely: upon
conventions and upon the electors to
nominate candidates, etc.
I'm other words the electors have the |
power to nominate candidates for every
office that a convention does because
as you will notice the power is con-
ferred In one sentence without any
qualification or limitation. Now, there
10 no question but what conventions
have always had and still do now have,
according to the supreme court, the
power to nominate presidential cleo
tors and candidates for congress, pro-
vided they are conventions OF po-
litical parties having cast less than 10 |
per cent Of the vote Of the state at the |
previous election. In other words, |
INTO nc ne l1111c0ll M