Milford chronicle., 1944-08-04
REPUBLICANS MUST HOLD NEW
CONVENTION TO NAME TICKET
toOnsinued from ysrss Pass,


/ was to eliminate the possibility q
/ challenging any of the candidate
elected at the July 19 convention.
The new convention will actual
ly reaffirm the nomination of thre
presidential electors, Governo
Walter w. Bacon and U. S. Repre-
sentative Earle d. Wiley for re
election; Clayton A. Bunting fol
lieutenant-governor; John S. Isa
acs, for reelection as state trea
surer. and ]. Morris Harrington
for reelection as state auditor.
This repeat performance of the
G. o. P. convention will be without
precedent in the history of Della.
ware politics.
Decision to hold the convention
was made Tuesday night after Mr.
Brown received an opinion from
Mr. Killoran and Judge Green.
Mr.. Browns decision precipitat-
ed two additional problems. One is
that the Republican convention
now will have to be between Au-
gust %, date of the Democratic
convention, and September l, the
date provided by statute on which
ballots must be certified to clerks
of the peace of the three counties,
under the new absentee ballot law.
This has been met by setting Au-
gust 20 as the date of the conven-
tiOn. The delegate primary cleo
tions are to be held Wednesday,
August 23, throughout the state.
The second problem involves the
Kent county primary, held also on
July 10. which is invalidated in the
opinion given to Mr.. Brown. New
candidates will be nominated in
that county on August %.
Although the New Castle County
Republican Committee was not in
volved in the irregularity. it will
be necessary for convention dele
gates to be elected there, as we'll
as in Kent and Sussex counties.
Mr.. Brown continued, because the
delegates elected for July 10 were
chosen for that date only and not
for given term.
The facts of the present case. as
outlined by Mr.. KiIloran and Mr..
Green. are that in Kent and Sussex
the county committees inserted the
required notice in two different
weekly newspapers for only one
issue. rather than in two weekly
county papers for two issues.
In Kent. the county primaries
were held on the same day as the
delegate elections and the same ir-
regularity as to notice is alleged
to have affected the nomination of
the county ticket.
The opinion given to Mr.. Brown
by Mr.. Killoran, in which Judge
Green concurred, stated:
I'VE early concluded that the
failure to publish the notice as re-
quired by statute would invalidate
the primary election held in Kent
county for the purpose of nomi-
mating county candidates to be vot-
ed for at the general election.
This conclusion is based upon
legal authority constituting to be
mandatory a statutory require
ment of notice as contained in the
Delaware statutes, particularly
when the validity of a primary is
questioned piror to the election of
the candidates named thereat.
The same construction would be
placed upon the statute with re-
spect to the notice required for
holding a primary election to elect
delegates to the state convention.
However. inasmuch as the conven-
tion has been held and the nomina-
tions made court would be in
clined, in our opinion, to uphold
rather than to defeat the will of
the party as express at the con-
This is particularly true where
il can be shown that there has been |
compliance with the
statute requiring the notice and
il cannot be shown that if the stat
lte had been strickly complied with
he result of the election would |
nave been different.
"In Kent and Sussex counties 4
here were no contests at the pri-
naries for election of delegates to |
he convention and it might be said |
hat the results could not have been
lifferent. 1t also might be contend
ID that there was substantial COM
Iliance because the notice was pub
ished in one issue of two weekly
in each county.
However, because of the i'm
)ortance of the question and the
effect upon the candi-
lacy of those nominated at the Re-
publican state convention. and also
lue to the dearth of legal precedent
m the question. we have concluded
o avoid specializing as to what the
ocal courts might decide relative to
he legality of the nominees Of the
and to advise the Repub-
ican state chairman to prepare for
second convention.
I'VE also advise the Republican
tate chairman that it is necessary
o hold another primary for the
nomination OF county candidates IN
lent County.
There is a distinction between
he primaries for the nominations
f delegates to the recent conven-
ion and the primaries in Kent
'Ounty for the selection of county
The county candidates
re yet to be voted for at the gen.
raj election and the validity of
heir candidates. can be questioned.
However, with respect to the
delegates. they have
erved their term of offices and it
5ould be much more difficult to
uestion at this date the legality of
heir election or the legality of the
selected by them. But,
S before stated, because of the ser
BUSINESS of the question, we have
dvised Mr.. Brown that it would be