Indiana daily times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1914-1922, 1920-04-09
NIBLACK FIGHTS
PRIMARY CHANGE
(Continued From Page One.)

OOlnIeQ out IL tA4c NOAApAdAAA.
should this be done. then the original
:. law will govern and second choice voting
will take place.
This will more than likely give to
some one on both the democratic and
republican tickets the majority of the
votes in the primary and settle the
nomination.
Personally, I have felt for some time
that 1 would get q large plurality of the
democratic votes in the primary, but with
four candidates in the field it would not
be certain that I could get a majority OF
all the votes.
Il have brought this suit with the full
expectation that should 1 receive only a
plurality of first choice votes, I will get
enough second choice votes to make the
majority sure.
otherwise, of course, I would not have
brought the suit"
WHAT BILL OF
COMPLAINT SAYS.
William V. Rocker, as attorney for Mr.
Niblack, fled the complaint, which sets
out the form of ballot which is proposed
to be used and the form of ballot that
it is contended is correct and for which
a mandate is asked.
- The complaint recites the basis for
attack on the enactment of 1917 the fol-
lowing:
THAT said defendant election commits
sioners, namely, James P. Goodrich,
William H. Thompson and William w.
Spencer. wrongfulIy and unlawfully as
sert and pretend, as the sole and only
justification for their said conduct in
preparing and making up said ballots and
for their said purpose in preparing and
making up said ballots and for their pur-
pose in issuing said ballots to be voted
81 said primary election next ensuing,
that the act entitled, An act 10 provide
for the holding Of primary elections and
conventions by political parties. for the
nomination Of candidates thereby, for the
violation of the provisions thereof ap-
proved March s, 1915 (Acts 1915. Page
S59l, has been revised and amended by
the general assembly by the enactment Of
an act entitled An act to amend Sections
?, 1, G, Z, s, 10, II, u, Is. 10. 20, q and 80
and TO repeal Sections % and IS OF an act
entitled An act to provide for the hold
ing Of primary elections and conventions
by political parties, for the nomination OF
candidates thereby, for the organization
of such parties, and prescribing penalties
for the violation Of the provisions
thereof" Approved March s, 1917. (Acts
1917, PAGE 354J
But this relator says and would show
unto the court that the said pretended
act of the general assembly of the state
of Indiana approved March s, 1917, is in
contravention Of the constitution of tho
state of Indiana, in each Of the follow
ing particulars:
a That said pretended act Of March
S, 1917, Is in contravention OF Article ",
Section 19 Of the constitution Of In1i-
ana
"B. That said pretended act Of March
:. 1917, is in contravention Of Article ~
Section II of the constitution Of Indi-
ana.
VARIANCE BETWEEN
TITLE AND TEXT CITED.
sAnd relator further says that there is
a variance between the title Of the act
Msnd the text of the act Of March S. 1917
hereinbefore mentioned, by reason Of
which variance said act is wholly void !;
and in respect of this variance between
the title and text Of said act, relator
says and would show unto the court. that
in and by the said act Of March s. 1917.
the general assembly in the title Of said
act declared a purpose and intent to re-
wise and amend certain sections, includ-
ing Sections %, IS and 50, but that the
text of said act did not accomplish the
revision or amendment Of said sections ;
that because OF said variance between
the title and text of said act. said act
Of March s, 1917, is contradictory within
its own terms and incapable of enforce
ment, and that any revision of said pre-
tended act of March s, 1917, is a duty Of
the general assembly which can not be
performed by the judiciary; and further
that the title OF said act of March 8
1917, being entirety and being in ex-
cess Of and beyond the provisions Of the
e i
title is unlawful and void and because OF
the fact that said title is unlawful and
void, said pretended act is wholly with
out any title whatsoever; and relator
further says and would show unto the
court that the title to said pretended act
of March s, 1917, is not true TO the text
II said bill, but that said title is false
SSand because thereof, is void and said pre-
tended act is wholly without any title
whatsoever; and relator further says that
it is the policy of the state of Indiana
ana the purpose and intent OF the people
Of che state Of Indiana as expressed in
and by their general assembly that nOmi-
nations for the Office Of governor shall
lie made by the people at primary cleo
tions and to accomplish that purpose and
the better 70 secure the rights OF voters
in respect thereof, it Is the policy Of the
eLdLe oL LAQAdua LuS purpose ana
intent Of the people as expressed through
their general assembly that there shall
be on said ballots for governor to be
voted at a primary election provision
made for the expression OF a second
choice and that any ballot issued in de-
NAL OF the right of voters to express
their second choice for said Office of gov
ernor is an unlawful ballot and that said
ballots which said election commissioners
are making up and preparing and which
they purpose TO make up and prepare and
issue TO the voters to be voted at the
next ensuing primary election for gov
ernor are unlawful ballots and in denial
Of the rights Of this relator as a candi-
date for said Office Of governor and
greatly to lis damage"
CHECKING BALLOT
AFTER SIXTY QUIT