Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1913-09-09
FORDYC[ CAN RUN
ON TWO TICKETS
Chief Justice Cummere Hands
Down Important Decision
in Election Case.

The regular Republicans of Pater-
son won a victory today whsu thief
Justice William s. Gummere decided
here that their candidate for mayor,
Robert Fl. Fordyce, should have his
name printed on the Progressive
(RoosevelD ballot at the primary
election, as well as the Republican
ballot.
The case of Candidate Fordyce was
presented by former Judge William
l. Lewis. counsel for the Paterson
Republicans. Fordyce had presented
two petitions to City Clerk Stand
even, of Paterson, one signed by a
number of Progressives and the
other signed by Republicans. Mem
bers of the Progressive party OBJ
jected to having the name of Fordyce
printed on their ballots at the pri-
maries. After this objection the city
clerk refused to accept the petition
of Fordyce, which was signed by the
Progressives, on the ground that a
candidates name could appear on
only one party ballot at the primary.
This argument was also made to-
day by City Counsel Edward F.
Mercy, of Paterson, who represented
the city clerk. He cited the election
laws of 1907, declaring that candi-
date cannot belong to more than one
political party and that the person
named in nominatig petition must
be a member of that party to which
the signers belong, Henry Marelli.
counsel for the1Progressives, who OBJ
jected to having the name of Fordyce
printed on their ballot, was also
present, but presented no argument.
declaring that Mr.. Mercy had given
his side of the case.
Chief Justice Gummere made a
lengthy Interpretation of the laws of
1907 and the Geran election act of
1911. He declared that the later act
superseded the act of 1907 and rec
ognized the likelihood of the same
candidate being nominated by more
than one political party.
I'm view of the later election act"
said the chief justice, 1T must be
seen that the city clerks refusal to
accept the Progressive petition for
Mr.. Fordyce was not legally justified.
Today our candidates are nominated
by petition and chosen at the pri-
maries. Years ago the candidates
were nominated at the conventions of
political parties. The right of suff-
rage, as I understand it, is that
man shall vote for anyone he wishes.
ANY attempt on the part of the
Legislature to dictate that a man
shall not vote for candidate, unless
of his own political faith, would bring
about a revolution. 1 have grave
doubts of the power of the Legisla-
ture to dictate to the voters who
shall be their choice, either for nomi-
nation or election.
''If the act of 1907" continued the
court, was put there with the in
tention of limiting the choice of the
voters. the act of 1911 was the re-
suit of second thought on the part of
the Legislature, recognizing the right
of the electors of the State to name
who they want for officehoders or for
nomination. Outside of the legal
aspect of the case the wisdom of the
act is shown in its provisions that
man must not wear the political gar
ments of any particular party in or
der to secure the Endorsement of any
members of that party regarding his
candidacy.
"It is my opinion that the clerk
ought to have accepted both petitions
and have the name of Mr.. Fordyce
printed on the ballots of both the
Progressive and the Republican
parties 1 will sign an order to that
effect "