Davidson v. Hanson
| Decision Date | 31 October 1902 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 13,351-(268).,s. 13,351-(268). |
| Citation | 87 Minn. 211 |
| Parties | CHARLES G. DAVIDSON v. PETER E. HANSON.<SMALL><SUP>1</SUP></SMALL> |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Squires & Griggs and George P. Metcalf, for petitioner.
W. B. Douglas, Attorney General, W. J. Donahower, Assistant Attorney General, George B. Leonard and John H. Steele, for respondent.
The following opinion was filed October 10, 1902:
This is an order requiring the secretary of state to show cause why he should not correct the ballots for state officers to be used at the next general election by placing thereon the name of Thomas Van Lear as a candidate for governor of the Socialist-Labor party, and to omit from such ballots the name of J. E. Nash as the candidate for governor of the Socialist party.
We simply announce at this time our conclusion on the question to be followed by a formal opinion hereafter, which is: Ordered, that the respondent, Peter E. Hanson, as secretary of state, place upon such ballots the name of Thomas Van Lear as the candidate for governor of the Socialist-Labor party; and, further, that he strike from such ballots the word Socialist after the name of J. E. Nash, as it appears thereon.
1. Reported in 91 N. W. 1124; 92 N. W. 93.
The following opinion was filed on October 31, 1902:
LOVELY, J.
Order to the secretary of state to show cause why corrections should not be made in the official ballot for the general election of 1902, issued under G. S. 1894, c. 1, § 48, and heard by the full bench, in accordance with the practice approved in Higgins v. Berg, 74 Minn. 11, 76 N. W. 788.
This and other hearings involving the preparation of ballots for voters by the officials charged with that duty have been recently considered under conditions requiring immediate action, in which decisions have necessarily been made in advance of handing down the opinions of the court therein.
The particular controversy here involves the right to use the names of political parties by candidates, with the incidental obligation of the secretary of state to recognize political organizations by such party names; the Socialist-Labor party seeking herein to prevent another political organization, previously known as the "Social Democratic" party, from placing its nominee for governor upon the state ballot under a newly adopted name, upon the claim that such course impairs the rights of the candidates of the Socialist-Labor party under Laws 1901, c. 312, — the "party-name-protection act."
Before referring to the specific statutory provisions involved, we should premise that candidates for elective state offices are nominated in only two ways: (1) By a convention; (2) by a certified petition of electors. Candidates for other than state offices — as district judges, congressmen, county officers, etc. — must be nominated under Laws 1899, c. 349, Laws 1901, c. 216, at a primary election, which supersedes and is a substitute for the previous method of nomination by convention. State v. Jensen, 86 Minn. 19, 89 N. W. 1126.
Since conventions are still retained for state officers, it is important to note certain features of the general election law which existed prior to the primary law to which we call attention. It is made the duty of the secretary of state in preparing the official ballot to place the names of a candidate thereon upon a certificate of the secretary of his party convention. This certificate shall, among other things, contain the name of the "party or political principle he represents" (expressed in not more than three words). G. S. 1894, § 37. Within the meaning of the general election law, a convention is defined to be
"An organized assemblage of delegates representing a political party, which, at the last general election * * * polled at least one per cent. of the entire vote cast in the state," etc. Section 39.
The remaining method of securing a place upon the state ticket is by a
"Certificate of nomination * * * signed by electors, * * * [if for a state office,] to a number equal to one per cent. of the entire vote cast at the last preceding election, * * * Provided, however, that the number of signatures required in the case of any state officer shall not exceed two thousand." Section 40.
In preparing the official ballot the secretary of state is given directions as to its form and the method of grouping the candidates for different offices thereon, and it is specially provided that
It is important to note, in passing, that since 1893, when the Australian system was adopted in this state, it has been the usual practice by the officers promulgating the official ballots to attach party designations to the names of candidates upon a certified petition of electors without objection, indicating by a uniform practice in that respect that such was generally understood to be the proper course under circumstances where usage is an important evidence of legislative intent. Occasionally candidates have ignored party affiliations, and have sought support upon individual claims solely. In such cases it has been the customary course for the officers making up the ballot to add to the name of the candidate the word "Independent," but whenever the electors in their certificate claimed a party designation it has been annexed to the name of the candidate; and, unless the provisions of the primary election law of 1899 (Laws 1899, c. 349) have distinctively defined a political party, and restricted the use of party names to nominations for state officers by conventions, or for other offices by the returns from the primary elections, we would naturally assume that the course previously in vogue was intended to be continued.
The Socialist-Labor party is a political organization, having been known in national and state politics since 1896. It did not, in fact, poll one per cent. of the entire vote of the state at the last general election. It, however, maintains a party organization, and has a state committee, whose secretary is the petitioner here. It secured a certificate of electors to the number of twenty-five hundred, nominating in proper form Thomas Van Lear for governor, and, with the legal fee, submitted such certificate to the secretary of state, requesting him to place his name, with the party designation "Socialist-Labor" attached, on the state official ballot. This respondent refused to do upon the ground that the Socialist-Labor organization had no standing as a party; that, if it ever had such right, it had lost it, because it did not poll sufficient votes at the last state election.
The Social Democratic party was, previous to the present year, a political group organized under that appellation subsequent to the Socialist-Labor organization. It had a distinct party existence, with an independent political propaganda, and polled at the last general election more than one per cent. of the entire vote cast in the state. It held a convention in July last, which named Jay E. Nash for governor, and adopted a resolution changing its name to the "Socialist Party." These facts were set forth and certified to respondent with the request that the name of Nash be placed upon the state ballot as a candidate for governor of the newly named Socialist party. Respondent accepted the proposed certificate and was about to comply with its request, when restrained by the order of this court, upon the conclusion that Nash had no legal right thus to use the word "Socialist" as a party designation, and that the Socialist-Labor party had a right to a place and party name on the official ballot under a petition of electors.
This conclusion rests upon the application of the party-name-protection act, above referred to, which we here quote in full:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial