Nelson v. Gass
| Decision Date | 03 March 1914 |
| Docket Number | 81912 |
| Citation | 146 N.W. 537,27 N.D. 357 |
| Parties | MARTIN NELSON v. M. GASS |
| Court | North Dakota Supreme Court |
Rehearing denied April 1, 1914.
Election contest over the office of mayor of Larimore; appeal from Grand Forks County, Honorable C. M. Cooley, J.
Judgment for contestee vacated.
Judgment of the trial court vacated. Appellants recovered costs.
S. J Radcliff and Scott Rex, for appellant.
Section 602, Revised Codes, provides for elections. Article fourteen (14) of chapter twenty (20) contains the provisions relative to city elections. Appellant contends that such provisions give the district courts of this state jurisdiction, and are applicable to a contest over the office of mayor of an incorporated city. 15 Cyc. 397; State ex rel. Simpson v Dowlan, 33 Minn. 536, 24 N.W. 188; State ex rel. Diepenbrock v. Gates, 35 Minn. 385, 28 N.W. 927; State ex rel. Jarvis v. Craig, 100 Minn. 352, 111 N.W. 3; Treat v. Morris, 25 S.D. 615, 127 N.W. 554; State ex rel. Anderton v. Kempf, 69 Wis. 470, 2 Am. St. Rep. 753, 34 N.W. 226; Com. v. Allen, 70 Pa. 465; State ex rel. Smith v. Anderson, 26 Fla. 240, 8 So. 1; People ex rel. Swift v. Bingham, 82 Cal. 240, 22 P. 1039; Dawson v. Superior Ct. 158 Cal. 73, 110 P. 479; People ex rel. Hatzel v. Hall, 80 N.Y. 117; Holbrock v. Smedley, 79 Ohio St. 391, 87 N.E. 272, 16 Ann. Cas. 155; State ex rel. Blake v. Morris, 14 Wash. 262, 44 P. 266; State ex rel. Heath v. Kraft, 18 Ore. 550, 23 P. 663; Winter v. Thistlewood, 101 Ill. 450; Cate v. Martin, 70 N.H. 135, 48 L.R.A. 613, 46 A. 54.
Mr. Gass solicited, induced, and persuaded a person to vote, on election day. Such person swore in his vote at the solicitation of Gass. Such acts are in violation of corrupt practice act of this state. Laws are to be liberally construed in the public interest. Adams v. Lansdon, 18 Idaho 483, 110 P. 280; Whaley v. Thomason, 41 Tex. Civ. App. 405, 93 S.W. 212; Healy v. State, 115 Md. 377, 80 A. 1074; State v. Milby, 26 Wash. 661, 67 P. 362.
The testimony of a witness (voter) that he had claimed the place where he voted, as his residence for years, is discredited by proof that he recently voted in another distant precinct. Carter v. Putnam, 141 Ill. 133, 30 N.E. 681.
The claim of residence in a given place is not sufficient. It must be coupled with acts which bear out such claim. People v. Ellenbogen, 114 A.D. 182, 99 N.Y.S. 897; Rev. Codes 1905, § 12.
The safest test of where a man's residence is, is where he usually sleeps. Linger v. Balfour, Tex. Civ. App. , 149 S.W. 795; Estopinal v. Michel, 121 La. 879, 19 L.R.A.(N.S.) 759, 46 So. 907; Moffett v. Hill, 131 Ill. 239, 22 N.E. 821; State ex rel. Hallam v. Lally, 134 Wis. 253, 114 N.W. 447, 15 Ann. Cas. 242; White v. Slama, 89 Neb. 65, 130 N.W. 978, Ann. Cas. 1912C, 518; Widmayer v. Davis, 231 Ill. 42, 83 N.E. 87.
The men H., R., and M. were illegal voters. It was a part of plaintiff's case to prove that these men voted for Gass. Where the election is by secret ballot an illegal voter may be compelled to testify for whom he voted. State ex rel. Doerflinger v. Hilmantel, 23 Wis. 422; People v. Turpin, 49 Colo. 234, 33 L.R.A.(N.S.) 766, 112 P. 539, Ann. Cas. 1912A, 724; Skain v. Milward, 138 Ky. 200, 127 S.W. 773; Black v. Pate, 130 Ala. 514, 30 So. 434.
Circumstantial evidence is ample to show how and for whom a person voted. White v. Slama, 89 Neb. 65, 130 N.W. 978, Ann. Cas. 1912C, 518; Rexroth v. Schein, 206 Ill. 80, 69 N.E. 240; Widmayer v. Davis, 231 Ill. 42, 83 N.E. 87; Welsh v. Shumway, 232 Ill. 54, 83 N.E. 549; Buckingham v. Angell, 238 Ill. 564, 87 N.E. 285.
The constitutional provision for a secret ballot (§ 129, Const.) is not self-executing, and it seems clear that appellant should have been permitted to prove that the election was not secret, and therefore to require answers from these voters as to whom they voted for. Ibid.
D. P. Bates, Geo. R. Robbins, and Geo. A. Bangs, for respondent.
Elections, and all matters related thereto, are confided to the legislative department; courts cannot interfere therewith; the legislature may provide a tribunal to determine the result thereof, and such result is final. 15 Cyc. 394; State ex rel. Narveson v. McIntosh, 95 Minn. 243, 103 N.W. 1017; Moore v. Hoisington, 31 Ill. 243; Moore v. Mayfield, 47 Ill. 169; People v. Smith, 51 Ill. 177; Dickey v. Reed, 78 Ill. 266; Jennings v. Joyce, 116 Ill. 179, 5 N.E. 534; Kreitz v. Behrensmeyer, 125 Ill. 141, 8 Am. St. Rep. 349, 17 N.E. 238; Keating v. Stack, 116 Ill. 193, 5 N.E. 541; Allerton v. Hopkins, 160 Ill. 448, 43 N.E. 753; Canby v. Hartzell, 167 Ill. 628, 48 N.E. 687; Baird v. Hutchinson, 179 Ill. 435, 53 N.E. 567; Douglas v. Hutchinson, 183 Ill. 323, 55 N.E. 628; Brueggemann v. Young, 208 Ill. 181, 70 N.E. 292; Simon v. Portland, 9 Ore. 443; McWhorter v. Dorr, 57 W.Va. 608, 110 Am. St. Rep. 815, 50 S.E. 838; State ex rel. Fawcett v. Superior Ct. (Fawcett v. Pritchard) 14 Wash. 604, 33 L.R.A. 675, 45 P. 23; Toncray v. Budge, 14 Idaho 621, 95 P. 26; State v. Buchanan, 35 La.Ann. 89; State ex rel. Woodruff v. Dortch, 41 La.Ann. 850, 6 So. 777; Reynolds & H. Constr. Co. v. Police Jury, 44 La.Ann. 863, 11 So. 236; Hipp v. Charlevoix County, 62 Mich. 456, 29 N.W. 77; Moulton v. Reid, 54 Ala. 320; Skrine v. Jackson, 73 Ga. 377; Caldwell v. Barrett, 73 Ga. 604; Clarke v. Rogers, 81 Ky. 43; 15 Cyc. 393; McCrary, Elections, 344; Paine, Elections, 793.
The general contest law does not authorize this contest. Rev. Codes 1905, §§ 688, 690, 693.
The statutory provisions embraced within § 2665, Rev. Codes, are analogous to § 47, Constitution, which reads: "Each House shall be the judge of the election returns and qualifications of its own members." Under such provision, courts cannot acquire jurisdiction. State v. Gilmore, 20 Kan. 551, 27 Am. Rep. 189; Hughes v. Felton, 11 Colo. 490, 19 P. 444; People ex rel. Drake v. Mahaney, 13 Mich. 493; 8 F. Stat. Anno. 322; Peabody v. Boston School Committee, 115 Mass. 383; People ex rel. Cooley v. Fitzgerald, 41 Mich. 2, 2 N.W. 179; Com. ex rel. McCurdy v. Leech, 44 Pa. 332.
The statute relates to the act of holding the election; not to an act which cannot be done until after the election has been held,--the contest. Treat v. Morris, 25 S.D. 615, 127 N.W. 554.
Sections 2665 and 2746, Rev. Codes 1905, when interpreted together, sustain the respondent's contention--as do the following cases: Linegar v. Rittenhouse, 94 Ill. 208; Winter v. Thistlewood, 101 Ill. 450; Foley v. Tyler, 161 Ill. 167, 43 N.E. 845; Booth v. Arapahoe County Ct. 18 Colo. 561, 33 P. 581; Colo. Const. art. 7, § 12.
This case is not here for trial de novo as in an equity case, but the findings of the trial court must be affirmed if there is any evidence to support them, the same as the verdict of a jury. State ex rel. Brady v. Bates, 102 Minn. 104, 112 N.W. 1026, 12 Ann. Cas. 105; Sec. 20, Corrupt Practice Act, chap. 129, Sess. Laws 1911.
The Corrupt Practice Act should be strictly construed. State ex rel. Crow v. Bland, 144 Mo. 534, 41 L.R.A. 297, 46 S.W. 440.
One's residence is where he remains when not called elsewhere for labor or other special or temporary purposes, and to which he looks and returns, in seasons of repose. There can be but one residence. Smith v. Thomas, 6 Cal. Unrep. 976, 52 P. 1079, 121 Cal. 533, 54 P. 71; Moffett v. Hill, 131 Ill. 239, 22 N.E. 821; Carter v. Putnam, 141 Ill. 133, 30 N.E. 681; Welsh v. Shumway, 232 Ill. 77, 83 N.E. 549; West v. Sloan, 238 Ill. 335, 87 N.E. 323; Collier v. Anlicker, 189 Ill. 46, 59 N.E. 615; Langhammer v. Munter, 80 Md. 518, 27 L.R.A. 330, 31 A. 300; Chew v. Wilson, 93 Md. 196, 48 A. 708; Turner v. Crosby, 85 Md. 178, 36 A. 760; Erwin v. Benton, 120 Ky. 536, 87 S.W. 291, 9 Ann. Cas. 264; Stewart v. Wurts, 143 Ky. 39, 135 S.W. 434; State v. Savre, 129 Iowa 122, 3 L.R.A.(N.S.) 455, 113 Am. St. Rep. 452, 105 N.W. 387; Huston v. Anderson, 145 Cal. 329, 78 P. 626; State ex rel. Hodges v. Joyce, 128 La. 434, 54 So. 932.
The intention of a person (voter) has largely to do with fixing his residence. Moffett v. Hill, 131 Ill. 239, 22 N.E. 821; Carter v. Putnam, 141 Ill. 133, 30 N.E. 681; Welsh v. Shumway, 232 Ill. 77, 83 N.E. 549.
But intent and act must unite. 10 Am. & Eng. Enc. Law, 2d ed. 599; People v. Turpin, 49 Colo. 234, 33 L.R.A.(N.S.) 766, 112 P. 539, Ann. Cas. 1912A, 724; Smith v. Croom, 7 Fla. 81; State v. Minnick, 15 Iowa 126; Vanderpoel v. O'Hanlon, 53 Iowa 246, 36 Am. Rep. 216, 5 N.W. 119; Spurrier v. McLennan, 115 Iowa 461, 88 N.W. 1062; Fry's Election Case, 71 Pa. 302, 10 Am. Rep. 698; 15 Cyc. 438; Schuman v. Sanderson, 73 Ark. 187, 83 S.W. 940; State ex rel. Morrill v. Massey, 10 N.D. 154, 86 N.W. 225.
The findings of the court are entitled here to the same credit as is the verdict of a jury. 15 Cyc. 437; Schuman v. Sanderson, 73 Ark. 187, 83 S.W. 940; Williams v. Buchanan, 86 Ark. 259, 110 S.W. 1024; Trafton v. Quinn, 143 Cal. 469, 77 P. 164; Hannah v. Green, 143 Cal. 19, 76 P. 708; Vigil v. Garcia, 36 Colo. 430, 87 P. 543; Moorhead v. Arnold, 73 Kan. 132, 84 P. 742; McCormick v. Jester, 53 Tex. Civ. App. 306, 115 S.W. 278; Caulfield v. Bogle, 2 Dak. 464, 11 N.W. 511; Jasper v. Hazen, 4 N.D. 4, 23 L.R.A. 58, 58 N.W. 454.
The plaintiff and defendant were rival candidates for election to the office of mayor of the city of Larimore in Grank Forks county, at the city election held April 7, 1913. The official canvass gave defendant 116 votes and plaintiff 113 votes. The plaintiff contested the election of the defendant on the grounds: (1) That illegal votes were cast for defendant by persons not qualified to vote; (2) that defendant violated the corrupt practice act by inducing and persuading one Hetherington to vote on election day.
A trial was had, and resulted in...
To continue reading
Request your trial