Judsonia weekly advance., 1913-07-16
DECREE DISSOLVES
 TIE INJUNCTION
JUDGE MARTINEAU IS NOT SUS- TANNED BY RULlNG-CHANCEL-
 LOR HAD NO JURISDICTION.

EOh HAD NO JO OfhioOiG iSN'
 Western Newspaper Union News Service. Little Rock-The Supreme Court re-
 fused to rule in favor of Former Con-
 gressman Stephen Brundidge in h=s
 contest of the nomination of George
 W. Hays by the State Central Commit 1 tee. The court failed to sustain the
 injunction issued by Judge Martinear,
 ruling that his court had no jurisdic-
 ton in the matter The court also 1 failed TO find where a fraud had been
 committed
 The opinion of the Supreme Court
 is a lengthy one and is given below.
 Before rendering it's opinion the court
 reviewed the case as follows:
 There being a vacancy in the office 1 of governor of the state of Arkansa arid a special election having been called | to fill same by Acting Governor J. Nj. I FNtrell, as required by the constitution, | fixing the date thereof July 2@. 1915, l the Democratic party through it's Cen l tral Committee, called primary elec- | tion for making the nomination ot I candidate for the office, fixing the date | or such election June 2l, lAIZ- It =llSo
 fixed June 30 thereafter as the date upon which the Central Committee should meet for canVaSsng the returns of the election and ceftificatiOn of the nominee. The appellee gave notice that he would contest the election before the Central Committee at it's meeting to canvass the returns and the nomination of his opponent. Judge Hays under the pro visions of Act 3T1 of the Acts of 1911. Fearing that the committee might not hear the contest he also procured a mandatory injunction from the Pulaski Chancery Court directing the said Committee to proced and hear his con test upon it's meeting ani to ascertain and announce the result of the primary election and certify the nominee which injunction was read to the committee upon the said 30th day of June.
 At the meeting of the committee after three days hearing of the contest 1t dc termiued from -he evidence before it and from such tnVestigati tioB as It had opportunity to make within the. time limited for the hearing thereof and thereafter certifying the nominee to the secretary of state within the time pre- l scribed by law that there was no proof
 made by the contestant and that the re | turns showed that Judge Hays had re ceived S61 votes more than his oppo- nent. the appellee. and declared him the nominee of the party and certified his nomi,ation to the secretary of state on 1 July ,. 1913.
 
 1 Thereupon. appelie filed a supplement | tai complaint in the Chancery Court 1 alleging that the committees had violated l the preliminary injunction had not l granted him a hearing of the contest,
 not heard the same as required by law. 1 ''but had only conducted d feigned and l pretended hearing had made no inNeStl- 1 gation of the frauds alleged to have l been perpetrated in the contest filed. had refused to allow appellee a reasonable 1 time in which to produce his evidence l and arbitrarily and opQresSiTciy violated | appellee's rights and fraudulently cer- 1 tified the name of George w. Hays. l contestee. before said committee. to I Earle W Hodges, the secretary of state. 1 as the Democratic nominee. That said | secretary of Stats unless restrained 1 from so doing will certify the name of i said contested. George w. Hays to the i various county election commissioners as the Democratic nomine for governor s l and that if same be done conteStee | will be deprived of all rights under the | law as contestant of said election and | that said certifcation. if allowed to pro- 1 ceed. will operate and will amount to an absolute denial to him of the right | to proceed with his contest as allowed 1 by law and the deeretal order of the ] court will result in rendering absolutely l nugatory and of no effect whatever, | said decretal order of the court. and l that it is his intention to further prose cute the said contest before the proper | tribunal to q final determination in the | forum as provided by law Prayer that | Earle w. Hodges. secretary of state, De l made a party and that restraining or l der issue preventing him from certify l ing to the County Board of Election | Commissioners the name of George ". 1 Hays as the nominee and that upon a | final hearing that the restraining order l be made permanent"
 | The appellant answered. admitting | that the Democratic State General Com mitte is a body especially created by 1 statute for the purpose of hearing con 1 tests and certifying nominees Of the | party; that it met on June 90. 1913, in l accordance with it's rules adopted prior | thereto; that it heard and considered l all the evidence presented by the con testant, allowing him all the time poasi- l ble in which to present his contest. md l permit the committee to ascertain and 1 determine the name of the nominee to | the secretary of state 20 days before 1 the date fixed for the election July 2S 1913. as required by law. That after 1 hearing all the evidence and argument | of counsel and acting as they believed | in compliance with the injunction and l in full compliance with their duty un- | der the law. found that the allega tions | of fraud were not sustained. were with out foundation and dismissed his peti- | tion for want of proof. That it fur | ther found that George w Hays had receive a majority of all the votes cast 1 1t the primary election and was enti- | tied to a certificate as nominee of the
 
 chairman and secretary to certify his l name to the secretary of state as such | Democratic nominee for the office Of l governor. It also alleged that the law | requires the secretary of state to cer- | tify out the said nomination to the | Roard of Election Commissioners of 1 the counties 8 days before the election 1 and oraved that the temporary iniunc- | tion be dissolved and a perpetual injunc- tion be denied
 The chancellor granted thes relief l prayed for and euioined the secretary | of state from certifying out the nomi- 1 ration made and returned to him by | the said Democratic Central Committee l and from the decree this appeal comes
 The Courts Opinion.
 The poinion of the court was writ
 ten hv Justice Kirby. In full. 1t reads
 as follows:
 | It is insisted that the chancery
 Court was without jurisdiction to is
 sue an injunction against the secre-
 tary of state to prevent him from cer- | tifying the name of the candidate as
 the nominee of the party. that hat
 been furnished him for that purpose q hxr tho Eyoc nf A.