Referendum Petition No. 119, State Question No. 381, In re, 381

Decision Date19 May 1959
Docket NumberNo. 38091,No. 381,381,38091
Citation339 P.2d 530
PartiesIn the Matter of REFERENDUM PETITION NO. 119, STATE QUESTION
CourtOklahoma Supreme Court

Syllabus by the Court.

1. Signers of a referendum petition must be registered electors at the time of signing the petition.

2. Where a hearing of an appeal from the order of the Secretary of State as to the sufficiency of a referendum petition has been referred to a referee of this court with directions to set the case for hearing and proceed therewith, and report to this court his findings of fact and conclusions of law, and trial de novo is had before such referee the findings of fact of the referee will be approved where there is sufficient evidence to support such findings.

Original proceeding brought by the protestants, Oklahoma Farm Bureau, et al., to review the finding of the Secretary of State declaring referendum petition sufficient. Referendum petition declared insufficient.

Charles Hill Johnes, Oklahoma City, for petitioner.

Frank Carter, Enid, for protestants.

PER CURIAM.

This is a proceeding commenced to review the findings of the Secretary of State declaring Referendum Petition sufficient. The hearing in this court is a trial de novo. In re Initiative Petition No. 142, State Question No. 205, 183 Okl. 343, 82 P.2d 803.

On August 27, 1957, there was filed in the office of the Secretary of State Referendum Petition No. 119, designated State Question No. 381, for the purpose of referring to the people of Oklahoma a measure of legislation designated as Senate Bill No. 367 of the 1957 Legislature which had for its purpose the exemption from the sales tax certain articles used in agriculture.

The Secretary of State counted as valid 52,385 signatures. A protest was filed to the sufficiency of the petition and it being declared sufficient by the Secretary of State, a proceeding was filed in this court protesting the finding of the Secretary of State. A hearing was conducted thereon before a referee of this court upon order of this court. A report of the referee was duly filed in which report the referee found 42,182 valid signatures. It having been stipulated and agreed that 42.968 genuine signatures were necessary for a sufficient petition the referee therefore found that the Referendum Petition was insufficient.

The parties duly filed their exceptions to the findings of the referee and this matter now comes on for disposition on the findings of the referee and the exceptions thereto by the parties.

The parties shall be designated as they originally appeared before the Secretary of State, to-wit: petitioner and protestants.

The referee found 5,306 signers, resident in Oklahoma County, were not registered voters at the time the peition was filed; that 1,521 of the signers in Tulsa County were not registered voters at the time the petition was filed; and that 686 signers, resident in Muskogee County, were not registered voters of Muskogee County on the date the completed petition was filed in the office of the Secretary of State. The referee further found 725 signers gave no post office address; that 301 signers gave no street address in Tulsa or Oklahoma City; that 342 signers did not give their christian names or initials; that 398 names were signed by persons other than the signers, said persons being signers purporting to act as agent for the remaining purported signers; that 655 names were those of alleged signers written by the circulator of the pamphlets involved or some other unauthorized person not a signer; that 119 names were eliminated because the circulator acted as notary; that 50 names should be eliminated by reason of the difference between signers signing the petition more than once and duplications of names challenged for numerous reasons by the protestants. By reason of these findings the referee eliminated as invalid a total of 10,103 names, thus arriving at the above stated conclusion that the completed petition consisted of 42,182 genuine signatures.

Petitioner has filed a general objection to the findings of the referee but raises only the specific challenge to the findings as to the nonregistered voters. The petitioner objected first to the eidence of proof of correctness of the records of registration, and, second to the evidence offered by the witnesses of protestants as to the nonregistration.

A certificate of the Secretary of the Election Board of Oklahoma County was introduced which stated that the records of registered voters were kept according to law and were complete. In the absence of evidence by the petitioner that the records were incomplete this is a sufficient showing of the correctness of the records, since the presumption is that public officials perform their duty. In re Referendum Petition No. 71, State Question No. 216, 179 Okl. 381, 65 P.2d 985; In re Referendum Petition No. 11, City Ordinance No. 7375, City of Oklahoma City, Okl., 297 P.2d 548.

There is no presumption of accuracy as to the check of these records and it is the duty of protestants to offer clear and convincing evidence of nonregistration. For this purpose protestants presented, in the form of exhibits, a list of 5,362 names of persons not registered in Oklahoma County. This check was made by a supervisor and her assistants. The supervisor and her assistants carefully and accurately checked this list against the registration records of Oklahoma County and the supervisor and each assistant testified as to the method and accuracy of their...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Initiative Petition No. 317, State Question No. 556, In re, 57824
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • 25 Junio 1982
    ...signing the petition were not registered voters. In making his decision the Referee relied on In the Matter of Referendum Petition No. 119, State Question No. 381, 339 P.2d 530 (Okl.1959); In re Initiative Petition No. 142, State Question No. 205, 176 Okl. 155, 55 P.2d 455 (1936); In re Ini......
  • Tyler v. Secretary of State
    • United States
    • Maryland Court of Appeals
    • 11 Septiembre 1962
    ...by an examination of the lists of registered voters compiled and kept by the supervisors of elections. In the Matter of Referendum Petition No. 119 (Okl.), 339 P.2d 530. The crux of the matter, as we see it, is not so much the falsity of the statement in the affidavit that certain of the pe......
  • In re Initiative Petition No. 365, 94,155.
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • 2 Julio 2002
    ...showing of the correctness of the records, since the presumption is that public officials perform their duty." In Re Referendum No. 119, State Question No. 381, 1959 OK 90, ¶ 8, 339 P.2d 530. But, as with any human endeavor, errors may occur in the process of comparing the signers of a peti......
  • Oklahomans for Modern Alcoholic Beverage Controls, Inc. v. Shelton
    • United States
    • Oklahoma Supreme Court
    • 5 Octubre 1972
    ...Tulsa, each failed to give a street address. These challenges are proper under the rule announced in In The Matter of Referendum Petition No. 119, State Ques. No. 381, Okl., 339 P.2d 530. However, of this total there are 34 challenged also as unregistered. Success of one challenge renders m......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT