Ledgerwood v. Pitts
Decision Date | 26 February 1910 |
Parties | LEDGERWOOD et al. v. PITTS et al. |
Court | Tennessee Supreme Court |
Appeal from Chancery Court, Davidson County; John Allison Chancellor.
Bill by W. L. Ledgerwood and others against John A. Pitts and others to restrain defendants, as primary election commissioners from acting under Compulsory Primary Election Law 1909, c 102. From an order overruling defendants' demurrer to the bill, they appeal. Affirmed.
Charles T. Cates, Jr., Pitts & McConnico, and Tillman & McCall, for appellants.
James C. Bradford, Vertrees & Vertrees, and D. B. Puryear, for appellees.
The fundamental question presented on this record is in respect of the constitutionality of chapter 102 of the Acts of 1909 popularly known as the "Primary Election Law." The bill was exhibited by complainants, as citizens and taxpayers of the state, against the members of the state Democratic and Republican boards of primary election commissioners, for the purpose of enjoining defendant commissioners from exercising their functions and having their salaries and expenses incurred by them in the execution of the act paid out of the funds of the state, on the ground that the act creating said boards is unconstitutional and void; and in the alternative, assuming said act to be valid, it is charged that commissioners were illegally elected or appointed. The complainants prayed for writs of injunction restraining the defendants from executing, or attempting to execute, said act, and for a decree declaring said act void and the election of defendants unlawful. The defendant commissioners demurred to the bill, assigning 15 specifications, all of which were overruled by the chancellor, the act adjudged unconstitutional, and an injunction granted restraining the commissioners from incurring any expense in the exercise of the powers or in the performance of the duties conferred upon them by said act. The defendants appealed, and have assigned the action of the chancellor for error.
The act in question is entitled "An act to establish a compulsory system of legalized primary law for political nominations, to create the agencies for its operation and penalize its violation." It is conceded that the act in its particular operation applies only to two of the political parties in the state--the Democratic and Republican--though by its terms it embraces all political parties which cast more than 10 per cent. of the entire vote of the state at the general November election next preceding the primary therein directed to be held.
Section 4 provides that party nominations in the primaries are to be determined by a majority of the popular vote cast in said election; and if any candidate receive less than a majority, a second or "run-off" primary must be held, at which the two candidates receiving the highest number of votes cast in the first election shall contest for the nomination.
Section 17, subsec. 7, invests the election officers with all the powers, duties, and privileges of election officers acting under the general election laws of the state, and are subjected to the same penalties for any act or deed declared by the general laws of the state as an offense in the case of the officers of regular state elections.
Sections 20, 21, and 22 prescribe the qualifications of those who participate in the primaries.
Section 20 provides: "That no person shall be eligible to vote in the primaries provided for by this act, who shall not, at the time of the same, be qualified to vote in the next general election held under the laws of the state."
Section 21 provides that the electors in the primary shall vote in their districts, as required by the general laws of the state.
This section also makes provision for challenging voters and for keeping poll lists and tally sheets, the certification of the counts, and returns of the vote.
Section 23 provides that one set of poll lists and tally sheets are to be sealed and addressed to the county court clerk and another set to the state board of primary election commissioners. Penalties are then prescribed for the punishment of any officer of election who is guilty of violating the requirements of the act.
Section 24 provides for the enforcement of the Dortch law or Australian ballot system wherever it applies to general elections.
The act in question also provides for the election of two primary election boards, prescribes the manner of their election, and defines their duties as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Gates v. Long
... ... ideal support of democratic institutions ... So, as ... said by this court in Ledgerwood v. Pitts, 122 Tenn ... 570, 125 S.W. 1036, 1039, "The object of this modern ... invention [a party primary] is primarily for the purpose of ... ...
-
Palmer v. Southern Exp. Co.
...Tenn. 420, 117 S. W. 508, 17 Ann. Cas. 254; Acklen v. Thompson, 122 Tenn. 43, 126 S.W. 730, 135 Am. St. Rep. 851; Ledgerwood v. Pitts, 122 Tenn. 570, 125 S.W. 1036; [165 S.W. 246] Ransom v. Rutherford County, 123 Tenn. 1, 130 S.W. 1057, Ann. Cas. 1912B, 1356; Coke & Coal Co. v. Steel Co., 1......
-
State v. Cumberland Club
...will be fatally defective ( State v. Hayes, 116 Tenn. 40, 93 S.W. 98; Saunders v. Savage, 108 Tenn. 340, 67 S.W. 471; Ledgerwood v. Pitts, 122 Tenn. 570, 125 S.W. 1036). Now are of the opinion that all of the provisions of the first section are germane to the purpose expressed in the title,......
-
Brown v. Smallwood
... ... 728; upon which the Idaho ... case seems to rest. In referring to these two and other ... cases, the supreme court of Tennessee, in Ledgerwood v ... Pitts, 122 Tenn. 570, 595, 125 S.W. 1036, said that the ... decisions in such cases were rested upon the proposition [130 ... Minn. 501] ... ...