Judsonia weekly advance., 1913-07-16
HAYS-BRUND|DC[ CONTEST
 SETTLED BY SUPREME COURT

certification of the nominee and a sub stitution of the judgment of the chancel- Tor for that of the committee.
 The recognized and established dis tinction bctwen equity and common law Jurisdictions are observed in this state. The constitution vests the judi cial power of the state in certain courts giving to tue Circuit Court jurisdiction in all civil and criminal cases, the eX- vested in some other court provided for by if. and 1t also provides that the General Assembly may establish sepa- rate courts of chancery and until it shall deem it expedient to do so the Circuit Court shall have jurisdiction tions. 1. II and 15, Constitution 1874.
 Political vs. Civil Rights.
 It is well also to bear in mind that the right of citizen to vote and to candidate for or to be elected to an office is a political right in contradis- tinction of a civil or property right. Fletcher vs Futile, 151 H.. 51; g N. l. 6S3: 25 L. R. A., td3; 10 Am. St Rep. 220; in re Sawyer, 124 IT. &, 200. Giles vs. Harris 1S9 U. S. 475; Green vs. Mills 69 Fed, S57; 16 c. C. A. 552: 30 |. R. \. 20; Winett vs Adams, go N. ". tNeb) 6S1.
 The legislature has created separate
 v them with Jurisdiction in matters of equity under authority of the constitu- tion and it becomes necessary to de- termine whether courts of equity had jurisdiction to protect a person in the enjoyment Of purely political rights at the time of the adoption of the constitu- tion.
 In Fletcher vs. Futile, supra the court passing upon a question like the one presented here and denying the right to an injunction. said:
 The question. then. is. whether the assertion and protection of political rights as judicial power is apportioned in this state between the courts of law and courts of chancery. are a proper matter of chancery Jurisdiction. We would not be understood as holding that political rights are a matter of judicial solicitude and protection, and that the appropriate judicial tribunal will not. in proper cases. give them prompt and efficient protection, but we thlnk they dc not come within the proper CcGnizance of courts of equity <"
 No Jurisdiction in Political Cases.
 Wherever the established distinctions between equitable and common law juris- diction are observed. as they are in this state, courts of equity have no au- thOrity or jurisdiction to interpose for the protection of rights which are merely political and where no civil or property right is involved. In all such cases the remedy, if there is one. must be sought in court of law. The extraordinary jurisdiction of courts of chancery can Hot, therefore. be invoked to protect the right of q citizen to vote or to be voted TOT at an election. or of directing or controlling an election where a man is a candidate for or to be elected to any office. Nor can it be invoked for the purpose of restraining the holding of an election. or of directing or controll- ing the rules of law in pursuance of which, an election shall be held. These F4s.-.t -eT- erty right, but pertains solely to the political administration of government. If public officer. charged with politi- cal administration. has disobeyed or threatens to disobey the mandates of the law. whether in respect to calling of conducting an election. or otherwise tho party injured or threa tened with injury in his political rights is not without remedy. But his remedy must be sought in a court of law ana not in q court of chancerY.
 I re Sawyer. 124 [. s. 2o0# he court said:
 The offices and jurisdic1 n of court Of equity unless enlara l by ex- press statute are limited to tk .Aexpress protection of rights of propeH Politf- cal rights consist in the po1f r to par tieipate directly and indire4 in the establishment or nanagem4 of the government These political ghts are fixed by the constitution. very citi- Zen has the right to votef for public officers and of being eledtad These are political, rights which te humblest citizen possesses. Civil rigllts are those which have no relation td the estab- ishment support or management of the government. They consist In the power of acquiring and enjoying property and powers and the like.
 U. $. Supreme Courts Ruling
 In Green ys. Mills, supra. Mr. Jus tice Fuller, delivering the opinion of the court, said:
 "The jurisprudence of the United states has always recognized the dis tinction between common law and equi- ty under the constitution. matter of substance, as well as of form of pro eedure. It is well settled that court of chancery is conversant with only matters of property and the main tenance of civil rights. The court has no jurisdiction in matters of a political nature nor to lnterefere with the duties Of any department of government unless under special circumstances and when necessary to the protection of the rights of property nor in matters merely crirni- nal of merely immoral which do not affect the rights of property.
 The editor of the A. x F, Ann. Cas- in note to tAe case of the L. s. Stand ard Voting Machine Co vs. Hobson, 10 A x F. Ann. Cas-. ar, states the rule as follows:
 Tt seems to be the uneontrovert ed rule that court of equity will not in- terfere to protect or to enforce a purely political right. If a political right is in- fringed upon the redress must be sought in a court of common law Otherwise. there would be an invasion of the do- main of other departments of the gov ernment and of the courts of common law. Citing cases in support thereof.
 The Supreme Court of Nebraska In Winnett vs. Adams. supra says
 The doctrine that equity Is conver- Sant with matters only of property and the maintenance of civil rights and will not nterpose for the protection of rights which are merely political. is support ed by almost unbroken line of au- thnrities."
 It then cites the authorities and. after court unqualifiedly to the doctrine that circumstances interfere for the protec- ton of political rights. continues:
 But we think it is perfectly safe to adopt the doctrine to the extent of holding that court of equity will not undertake to supervise the acts and management of political party for the nrotection of a purely political right We do not overlook the fact that primary elections have become the subject of legislative regulation and 1t may be con- ceded that each member of a political party has a right to a voice in such primary. and to seek nominations for nublic office at the hands of his party. But when he is denied these rights or 1, unreasouablv hampered in their exercise he must look to some other source thar court of equity for redress. To hold