The producers news. [volume] (Plentywood, Mont.) 1918-1937, 1919-12-26


1000 ballots furnished for any pre-
cinct as 1000 and to receive pay
ment therefor. For instance, in said
Precinct No. 3 he furnished Repub-
lican sample ballots to the number
of 90, and Republican official ballots
to the number of 80, making 1874
Republican ballots furnished for this
precinct. Defendant contends that
he is entitled to consider the pre-
cihct as a unit and to receive pay
ment as though he furnished 1000
ballots (Republican) instead of 1874.
I do not believe this contention can
be sustained upon any theory which
may be presented to sustain it. The
law is plain in its terms and unam-
biguous, and admits of only one
construction, and that is that the
maximum amount which the county
commissioners may allow for the
furnishing of ballots for the county
primary, other than presidential pri-
maries, is Twenty-Five and $1,000
Dollars ($22.50) per party for the
first 1000, and Twelve and $1,000
Dollars ($12.5O) for each additional
1000. A case similar to this one
was decided by the Supreme Court of
Kansas in 1902: Honey v. Board Of
County Commissioners Of Jewell
County, 70 Pac. 1913. In that case the
court said as follows:
"Plaintiff in error entered in
to a contract with the commits
sioners of Jewell county for the
printing of the ballots to be used !.
at the general election of 1898,
and did print 1920 thereof.
There were six tickets printed ON
each official ballot, for use in Is
townships. He was entitled to
charge $13 per thousand, or frac-
. ton thereof. Gen. St. 1901, Sec.
27O8. He printed less than a
thousand for use in each of the =
townships, except three. For
these three he printed and fur
nished 1,15O each. In present.
ing his bill for the county for
the work (that is, so much for
so many thousand ballots, or frac-
ton of thousand), but divided
the ballots up between the rs
different townships, and doubled
his claim by charging for frac-
ton of 1000 for each separate
township. Thus, he charged $13
for 700 ballots for Jackson town.
ship, the same amount for $50
for Sinclair township, $26 for
1,150 ballots for Buffalo town.
ship, and the same amount for
! Center and Burr Oak Townships.
He was allowed by the board
1864. A warrant was drawn
therefor and paid by the county
treasurer. This action was
brought, under Gen. St. 1901, Sec.
T. 1649, to recover back the amount
of the illegal allowance. It is
!, claimed by the county that the. .
defendant below was entitled to
be paid the sum of $13 per thous-
and for 1900 tickets, and $13
more for 200 additional, or to-
tai amount of 1924 only. Judg-
ment was entered against the
defendant below (plaintiff in err
ror here) for $3.50, together with
$3.50 penalty and $25 attorneys
fees, under section 1649 of the
statute SUPRA"
The court said as follows:
1--WE are clear that the de-
PENDANT in error, in making his
claim against the county, could
not separate the items of his bill
! BY charging to each township a
fraction Of thousand ballots,
and receive $13 pay for each Of
| such fractions. The statute
means that if, in the whole
number of ballots furnished to
the county clerk for use at the
eelction there shall be fraction
of q thousand over the total
number of thousands supplied,
then the printer shall receive $13
for that fraction, when there are
as many as six tickets printed
on the ballot"
According to the agreed statement
of facts, the defendant furnished 49,
1872 ballots at this election for the
Republican party. In my opinion he
is entitled to receive the sum Of
$15.75 for the first 1000 ballots fur.
nished, and compensation at the rate
of 1915 for the remaining 1892, OF
a total of $295.75 for all of the Re
publican ballots furnished. Accord.
ing to the stipulated facts, the mum
Der of ballots furnished for the De-
mocratic, Socialist and Nationalist