The American issue. [volume] (Westerville, Ohio) 1912-19??, 1918-05-10
Wet Decision Keeps Saloons
in Mt. Pulaski
EBBERT EXPLAINS LAW
Ruling Of Judge Was Not Justified
By Law or Facts
VOTERS WILL REMEMBER

.-----
Mt. Pulaski, which voted dry by a
good majority on April the End will
remain in the wet class. The will OF
the voters was defeated by decision
rendered in the contest brought on by
the vets. Frank B. Ebbert, Attorney
for the Anti-Saloon League, who rep
resented the drys in the contest, and
one of the best authorities in election
contest cases in the country, has pre-
pared the following statement rela-
tive to the Mt. Pulaski case:
"Thc most unfair decision ever rem
dred in a local option contest election
case was handed down by Judge H. b.
Eaton of Madison county on May /,
affecting the town of Mt Pulaski in
Logan county, where he had been
called in to hear the contest byA Judge
Charles ]. Gehlbach, the regular
County Judge Of Logan county, who
apparently did not have the nerve to
try this case himself and so called in
Judge from one OF the wettest coun-
ties in the state OF Illinois to act for
hii...
The local option petition filed in
this case with the township clerk con-
tanned the signatures of 500 legal vot-
efs, Of the township. Two hundred
and hfty-threc names only were re-
. quired for valid petition, so the Pc
tition contained ESQ signatures more
than were necessary.
"At the top OF each sheet TO the pc
tition, or in the caption, it was stated
that all of the signers to the petition
resided in the county of Logan, state
of Illinois and town OF Mt. Pulaski.
There was an affidavit at the bottom
OF each sheet to the petition stating
that every signer to the petition lived
in the county Of Logan, state of Hi
nois and town OF Mt. Pulaski.
The Law Is Plain
"The statute provides that after the
signer's signature shall be written his
house number, the street and date of
signing. There is no requirement in
the statute whatsoever that after the
signer's name shall be written any
city, town, county or state. This in
formation is provided for under the
statute in the caption and conclusion
of the petition and is not required
under the law to appear after the
signer's signature.
1.-TWO hundred and sixty signers to
the Mt. Pulaski petition, after giving
their street address, as required by
the statute, further specified that they
lived in Mt. Pulaski. This informa-
ton was more in itself than the law
requires.
Judge Eaton held in his opinion
that 200 signatures to this petition
could not be counted as valid sigma
lures because after the word mt
Pulaski did not appear the county of
Logan, SldlS Ol lillllOlS.
Decision Covers Point
This particular point has never been
din city passed upon by the Supreme
Court of Illinois. 1t has, however,
been directly passed upon by the Su-
preme Court of Colorado in the case
of People v. Newell, Volume 40 Colo
rado Supreme Court Report, page 34o,
, in which the court used the following
language;
1T is contended that, since no
name of any city, town, village,
postoffice, or of any county or
state is written opposite any sig
nature upon the petition, the
same contains no residence ad-
dresses, and is therefore fatally
defective and void. No
where the prescribed form of the
petition, except in the body
thereof, does it seem necessary
to write either the name of the
precinct, the city, town, postoffice,
county or state. 1t appears
therefrom that it is in exact form
as prescribed by law.
"The Colorado statute is practically
identical to the Illinois statute and
was taken from the Illinois law
(Swartz " People, 46 Colorado SUI
preme Court Report, page 23o). The
Newell case was cited with approval