Tonopah daily bonanza. [volume] (Tonopah, Nev.) 1906-1929, 1920-09-17

"' '"' SVL 'ilGdle VI uOUludtlO
shall be signed by electors withi
the state, district or political sub
division for which the candidates ar
to be presented, equal in number t.
at least 10 per cent of the entir
vote cast at the last preceding gen
eraI election in the state, distric
or political subdivision for which tn,
nomination is made, find that tn,
county clerk admits the pleadingl
here, all the pleadings show that tha
requirement Of the statute has beer
complied with by the respondents
here, Then the statute reads: Sale
signatures need not all be appended
to one paper, but>each signer shall
add to his signature his place OF
residence 1t is contended by coun
sci Tor the respondents that that
| provision or sentence Of the section
is directory merely. | am unable to
agree with counsel upon his posi-
of the primary election law, we find
tion so stated for this reason: From
a reading Of the entire section there
IS nothing for the clerk to do but
to file the petition 1t is unlike
| those statutes. or rather those cases
, interpreting and constituting statutes
! which provide that the county clerk
or the city clerk or the officer be
fore whom the petition is filed shall
do certain things after the petition
itself is tiled, such as check the
names, some statutes even 20 so
lar as to say that he shall refer TO
the great register in order to ascer-
tain whether or not the signers are
qualified electors Our statute is 81
lent in that particular. It does not
provide for the clerk doing anything.
And for that reason | construe the
statute to mean that only those pc
titions which conform to the statute
itself may be accepted and filed by
the county clerk and among the pro
visions or requirements for such Ger
tiiicates Of nominations we find a
provision that the signer shall add
to his signature his place of resi-
dence. ! do not believe that the
court is concerned with the reason
Tor any such requirements the legis
.ature has seen tit to exact that con
ditjon and / do not believe the
court can ignore such a provision.
Taking up the Kentucky case. |
upon which the respondents seem to
rely mainly, | think that it is easily |
distinguished from the case at bar |
in two particulars as set forth by |
counsel for the petitioners here, the
first of which is that it was an OBJ
lection which was raised subsequent
to the election itself and after the
people had expressed their choice
and think the court very wisely
held There that in order to defeat
the will of the people so expressed
that there should be very substan
tal reasons furnished In the in
5tant case cannot agree with coun-
sci for the respondents that this is
Ike case where the point is raised
after election The rights of the
people themselves, a majority of the
people who voted at the election in
he Kentucky case, were being con-
'idered by the court In the instant
'ase 1t is simply a review of the
,ourt of the acts OF the individual
respondents themselves, and if they
laVe failed to comply with the re-
luirements then they are the only
uferers because as yet the people
lave not expressed their choice oil
'ominees for the office TO which the
espoudents aspire II
think the Kentucky case is
gain distinguished from the instant
ase In this that the Kentucky stat
tie used the words designate the
rsIdence and post Office address oflE
he petitioners" meaning the sign II
rs of the petition. where our stat
fa Usaa ulafH and 81 eaa4,ts e., ,,,1 ! y