Case Name: Philips v. Smith et al.
Court: Colorado Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Colorado
Decision Date: 1898-09
Citations: 25 Colo. 456
Docket Number: No. 3977
Parties: Philips v. Smith et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Colorado Reports
Volume: 25
Pages: 456–460

Head Matter:
[No. 3977.]
Philips v. Smith et al.
Elections—Nominations by Petition—Re&ulabity.
Where two sets of nominees claim to be the nominees of a political party, the controlling question in the contest is which set was nominated by the regular convention of the party, and the same rule applies to nominations by petition. The regularity of a convention depends upon its assembling in accordance with a call by those representing the party in the district .for which the convention assembled, and a nomination by petition by persons authorized to represent a political party and under the direction of the representatives of that party, will be received in preference to one made by persons not so authorized, even though the latter be first filed with the proper officer.
Upon Review from the District. Court of Lake County.
Charles Cavender and others were nominatedby petition as the candidates of the Teller Silver Republican party, in which petition the emblem of that party, theretofore filed in the nomination of a state ticket, was also adopted. This certificate of nomination was filed on the 20th day of October, 1898. Previous to the time of such filing, a meeting of the representatives of the party was held in Denver, at which a member of the state central committee and chairman of the county committee were appointed for the county of Lake, who subsequently directed a petition to be circulated, nominating the respondents for the same offices under the name and emblem claimed by Mr. Cavender and his conominees, which certificate was tendered for filing October 22, 1898. In the proceedings had before petitioner, as county clerk and recorder of Lake county, it was held that those named in the certificate of nomination filed October 20, were entitled to appear on the official ballot as the nominees of the party for the county named. On review by the district court, this ruling was reversed, and judgment rendered that the list of persons named in the certificate tendered for filing October 22, was entitled to appear upon such ballot, from which judgment petitioner brings the case to this court for review.
Mr. John A. Ewing and Mr. J. M. Maxwell, for petitioner.
Mr. W. H. Bryant, for respondent.

Opinion:
Mr. Justice Gabbert
delivered the opinion of the court.
When a contest arises over different sets of nominations claimed to have been made by the same political party, one of the controlling questions always is, which set was made by the regular convention of such party ? Ordinarily this regularity depends upon a nomination made by delegates selected and convening in accordance with the call by those representing the party in the district in which such convention is held. The same rule with regard to regularity must be observed and control in nominations made by petition. If a party is organized, although' it may not have sufficient strength to make nominations by convention, it is entitled to have whatever proceedings it may take with reference to making nominations protected in the same way that nominations by. conventions are, and, therefore, if parties undertake to make a nomination by petition who are not authorized to do so, such a nomination cannot be sustained as against one made by those who do represent the party. The nomination of respondents, as the nominees of the Teller Silver Republican party was at the instance and under the direction of the representatives of that party for the county of Lake, and al though the certificate of such nomination was filed with the county clerk and recorder subsequent to the one filed by Mr. Cavender and his conominees, it is entitled to recognition as against the latter, for the reason that the nomination so made was at the instance of the representatives of the Teller Silver Republican party, and the latter was not. The judgment of the district court is affirmed.
Affirmed.