THE SUNDAY OREGOXIAX, rORTLAXP, FEBRUARY 18, 1912.
!
CilflSOFFUi
OF VARSITY REPLY
Counsel for University of Ore
gon in Referendum Fight
Files Brief.
NAMES HELD AS TOO FEW
rjl ExhaaatJvw Answer
to JjotAns Sid la Appeal and
Contend Frmad Xnlllfle
All Petition.
8 ALEX. Or, Tib. IT, (Fpeolal.) H
plylnr to th appollaat'a brif la tb
University of Ortfoo r(arndm case,
th respondent's brief cam from tb
hand of tb prtntr tat moraine
la-ned or W. T. Bim.fr. U. E. Posuo
and Martin L. Pip, aa attorney tor
it. 8. rrindly. rtprnBUnf th Uni
versity, which won la tbo lowr court.
Th brUf take op and iniwiri tho
point rtlwd by tho plalntirra ana ap
pellant that became petition were
attached to tho flrat eht of a certain
number of th et that tbo earn on
thee petition sbonld bo counted la aa
valid.
In touching; npoa thla point, tbo brief
of tho respondent say:
It la admitted a a fact that fill
namea of lea-al Toter of tho tato aro
required to bo npoa thla petition to
refer the measure.
"It la also admitted by counsel for
defendant that plaintiff vldene es
tablishes the existence of tho altered
conspiracy and fraud to tho extent, at
least, of those parts of the petition
verified by Harry Goldman. Robert
Goldman. Joseph Gorbam. Charle Talk.
Fred Koch. Harry Color and W. M.
Reynolds. Tho number of tbo section
of tho petition Termed by each ono of
these person and th number of name
thereon are correctly given at pac 41
of appellant' brief, excepting that tbo
number of namea on the part verified
by Robert Goldman should b 1 1 In
stead of IIS, as there siren, and th
total names admitted to bo rold should
bo 1771 lnntead of T. aa there stated.
Of these rold name & will b found
on that part of tho petition claimed by
tho plaintiff to bo void because of tho
absence of any form of petltloa on
each sheet.
lOO Mere Saaaeo Dee see Bad.
"Up to this point tho casa stand
thua: 1771 namea of th petition, ad
mitted to bo void, aro to bo added to
tho difference between the total num
ber of name, MOS on th defective
form of the petition and SS thereof
which are fictitious, or 4i:S namea
that aro void under tho decision of this
court In I'almer vs. Benson, to Ore.
177. The total numer of namea thus
Invalidated amount to 1301. To tbeao
should be added 100 namea on section
7 of the petition, which are void be
cause not legally verified. Through
out the remainder of tho petition, not
thus challenged, there are a large num
ber of namea, appearing; on tho face of
tho petition, which do not appear In
th affidavit at all. These amount to
probably 200 name or mora. Ignor
ing; the latter as definite, and taking;
th total namea on th petition as
IJ.m. and deducting; 1401 namea a
rold. leave but Hit names, so far
unchallenged. Thla number, however,
la 21 short of tho required number,
to-wlt: 11S. necessary to refer th
measure. Thla shortage may b ma
terially Increased by a careful scrutiny
of the remainder of tho petition, to
eliminate names not Included In tho af
fidavit or In tbo wrong county, or
fraudulently mad, and other objec
tions that might be made. But w
5-lre to present this caa to tho court,
flrat upon an admitted state of facts,
as applied to tho law. announced In tho
case of Palmer vs. Benson, and It la
not necessary to go further Into tbo
fact at thla time If that decision of
thla court la to b followed. Defend
ant trie, however, to avoid thla result
by claiming that signature oa the
first page of each of th IT section
of th defective form of th petltloa
not admitted to bo fraudulent must bo
counted for reasons stated at pares T
and of appellant's brief, claiming
that the first sheet Is. In fact, attached
to another sheet containing a form of
petition; and this must follow, counsel
say. ovea uader plaintiff construction
of the law. Counael I In error aa to
th law and our construction of the
law. Tho law requires th form of
the petition to be printed on each sheet
containing signatures, but tho copy of
the measure to be referred may be on a
separate plec of paper, attached to
tho petition."
Fraod Iratal Attacked.
The brief further goes on to touch
on the question of allegations In the
plaintiffs and appellants' brief la
which lack of testimony Impeaching
the good faith of the circulators Is as
serted. The brief says:
"Before proceeding further, w call
the court' attention to appellant's
statement to the effect that In ail th
record of evldenc In thla caa there
la not a line of testimony linpeaohlng
the good faith of any of th clroulator
of the petitions, on which 1144 came,
tabulated In appellant brief aro
found: and that la all tbo record there
le aot a Una of testimony, hearsay or
otherwise, that pretends ta oonaoot
any one of th circulators, who ob
tained any of those signature, with
any fraud or conspiracy. W wish th
court to carry thla statement In Its
mind whan examining plaintiff Sid
of the case, and the testimony of the
defendant. Whoever Is responsible for
tho making of that statement cannot
claim to be fair to th court or to re
spondent's counsel la thla case, and
gainsay counsel's declaration, made at
th opening of their brief, aa to their
fair Intention In developing fraud.
In response to the appellants' alle
gation the respondent says:
"At pag six of th appellant' brief,
th statement Is mad that 'Aa to tho
fraud and conspiracy, the plaintiff, by
hi detectives and other witnesses, at
tempted to Impeach HOT names on the
referendum petition. W are not pre
pared to dispute th exact correctness
of tho number of namea aald to bav
been challenged. It I certainly min
imised, bnt the principle Invoked re
mains. Tho statement continue: "Of
these 711 were among th forged or
fictitious names, furnished by the
above-named circulators, all of this
work Is wholly eliminated from the pe
tition.' They ar eliminated only In
the sent that the proof of fraud,
submitted by plaintiff, was so conclu
sive that counsel for defendant was
obliged to admit that IS sections of the
petition, containing 1771 names, were
wholly fraudulent and void. ....
Rxperta Teat 'aaay- Aamlled.
"By an arbitrary line, ar constructed
In counsel's brief In an attempt to
show that th testimony of detectives
engaged Is not to be believed. But
this paragraph admlta that their testi
mony could not be disputed as to the
Til names there mentioned; and of IS
other names In tho remainder. The
statement quoted also assumes that
th original signature of voters wer
on some cards, used In th clerk's of
fice, which Is not a legal registration
record. Now. as to County Clerk Fields'
expert deputies, who aro pitted against
plaintiff's detectives, we do not wish
to challenge the honesty, but the ex
pertnes of these deputies. Counsel
refer to Miss illnnle Burke and Mrs. N.
S. Starr, who ar deputies in Mr. Fields'
office and who testified in this case,
but who are not experts In any legal
sense, as qualified to give opinion evi
dence as to comparison of different
handwritings. Miss Burke testified that
she bad registered the voters, written
up the registration booka and cards in
th clerk's office for a number of years.
Mrs. Starr testified that sh had done
the same kind of work. Th evidence
of the two witnesses is. that the
namea oa the petition wer compared
with tho name on what they termd
registration cards. Ther is no law au
thorising a registration to -be upon a
card, but It must be in a book, ruled
and mad up as prescribed la the stat
ute. The comparison therefor has not
been mad with an official record nor
with an admitted signature, nor with
on shown to be genuine, and hence It
la not binding upon th plaintiff."
Karnber Lacking Alleged.
In' summing up this part of the evi
dence th brief ay:
W bav now Impeached for fraud
of th circulator, himaelf. by the de
fendant's own witnesses, th work of
E. Waller. Charle Matthew. Walter
Thurber. F. J. Wool wine, J. C Dirk and
F. M- Raymond, amounting to 1714
namee In all. which are tn addition to
tb 1771 names, admitted by tbo de
fendant to be void; but Field's report
also contains "suspected" names and
"bad names In the work of other cir
culator. In addition to these, plain
tiffs exports Include In the fraudulent
work the namea of the following circu
lators: F. J. Hartmtn, Otto Newman.
W. L. Carpenter. W. A. Dlebold and H.
W. Maraton. which circulators verified
a total of lilt namea. making a total
of 7(41 namea. against which a prima
fade case has been made, leaving only
47 namea, aa yet unchallenged, but
leas than the required number."
In th final legal argument the brief
aaya:
"In appellants' brief th Issues ar
stated. Th first Is: Whether plaintiff
has capacity to bring this suit. If
such a suit can be brought and a cltl
sen cannot bring It, appellants fall to
point out who can. ...
alt Held to B Legal.
-It la admitted that a cltlsen can
apply for a writ of mandamus to com
pel th Secretary of Stat to HI a peti
tion which be has refused to file, and
It I contended that In that proceeding
and In no other. If tho petition la found
not legally sufficient, th court may
. i .w- a-. rf state from
certifying or printing on th official '
ballot th ballot title) ana purpow
such measure. Our contention, on the
contrary, is that there are two distinct
proceedings provided for, on to cover
ike rmmm where th Secretary of State
refuse to 01 a petition offered, and
the other the caae where he has filed
a petition but afterwsrds It Is claimed
not to bo legally sufficient. That the
two proceedings are contemplated la
manlfeat from the language of the act.
There la no room here for an In
junction against the Secretary of Stato
against filing th petition. In th cas
supposed the petition has not been filed
and will not bo filed by him unless
mandamuaed to do so. To enjoin th
Secretary of State, therefore, meana to
enjoin him from doing something;
which, unlea anjolned. he would
do. . ..
Th ttatut plainly prcriDes wnai
a .v.uiTT to authorise an application
by any cltlsen for a writ of mandamus,
and when th application may b made.
It alo specifically preacrlbe what may
b done by th court In such an action,
and what th Secretary tnuit do. The
court may find the petition legally suf.
flclent. and If It does, tnii is an mat
It Is authorised to do. It does not order
the Secretary to file the petition, or to
do anything else. But. In the event th
court ha found and entered a Judg
ment that th petition la ieguy aum
clnt. th statut execute th Judg
ment by requiring th Secretary to file
v.- --iitinn with a certified copy of the
Judgment attached thereto, and ther
th statute anus aa io a w.
dam us. ...
Right to latervem) .
rh cltlsen. and every cltlsen. hna
th asms right to prevent false and
fi-.nituient petitions from being filed
and made effective as to require that
boneet and good petition shall be filed
and made effective. It Is Just as much
a deprivation of th right of Initiative
and referendum reserved by tho con
stitution to th people ror lorgea ana
fictitious names to be tiled as It Is to
have bonest petitions rejeciea. m
either caaa the right Is Impaired, and
If the contention of appellants be ac
cepted a th law th right Is practic
ally destroyed. Tb Inltlatlv and rf
rendum la reserved to th legal voters
of the stat. It la not reserved to a
confederation of criminal and forg
era . . . ...
"But It la further eontenaea "
th. nlalntlff ha capacity to su h
must bring his suit within 10 days aftr
th Secretary of State file th petition.
There ta no uch expres limitation of
time as to th Injunction suit provided
for by th ctlon. Th contention la
that tb 10 days' limitation In writs of
mandamus applies also in th eulta to
enjoin the Secretary of Stat. . . .
-There must be a reiusai w aim iv
atart Ihe atatute running In that parti
cular caae. . . . There can be n
refusal to file a petition, when tn sec
retary baa. la fact, filed It.
Limitation Argaaaeat Attacked.
X'txJer the Constitution a referen
dum petition nut b 111 with th
Scrtary of Slat within 0 days after
the final adjournment of the aeeslon
of th Legislative Assembly which
passed th bill on which th referen
dum I demanded. A peUtlon might be
lawfuly offered for filing on the last
day of this period, and being rejected,
tb person offering to 111 tb petition
might be without remedy. . . .
"But when a petltloa baa been one
filed within tho 0-dy period, no such
emergency can arise, for usually 10
months must transpire after th filing
of a petition before it becomes neces
sary to cerUfy a ballot title. More
over the discovery of fraud la a peti
tion, already filed, could not, by th
moat diligent efforts, b discovered
within th supposed limitation of ten
days. . .
-X law becomes effective In the ab
sence of a referendum petition 90 dsys
after the termination of th legisla
tive session. If a petition Is rejected
by th Secretary of State th law would
apparently become operative at th end
of th to-days period. The people and
th courts would be called on to obey
It and to enforce It. If. therefore, a
cltlsen could apply for a writ of man
damus after a considerable period sub
sequent to the, offer of the petition, and
If. upon a decree of he court, tb
petition were ordered to be filed aa
of tb date when it was offered, w
should bav a period of time when It
could not b certainly known whether
the act referred to was tb law or not.
Either th law would be operative In
ucb cas after the 10-day period and
would be declared so by the court, or
It would be auspended merely by th
right of a cltlsen to bring mandamua
at any time before the printing of the
ballot. Such a situation would be In
tolerable, and It Is for that very good
reason, doubtless, that the Legislature
required the writ to be applied for
within the short period of ten days. But
In the case where the Secretary has
filed a petition, to apply the ten days
rule would defeat th right of th
I, I.I
It would be to your Interest to look at this kind of furniture before buying, even if we could show
you only a few piece,. But we can-and do-offer you the widest selection, m ar range -of styles and
prices certain to surprise and please you.
For example, we have a very pretty, well-made Mahogany Suite -Bed, sseTl.&J.
Chiffonier for $34.00. also have a Prima Vera Suite f of $1300.00. Also scores of Suites m all inter
mediate grades.
Three good Suites are in our Windows this week.
One is a beautiful Louis XVI Enameled Suite in ivory-a very popular finish. It contains Dresser,
Chiffonier, Toilet Table, Bed and Cheval Glass, and sells complete for $2o0.00.
Another is dark Mahogany of 'Empire Colonial design, Dresser, Chiffonier, Toilet Table and Bed.
Total, $280.00.
The third is in Rosewood and includes Dresser, Chiffonier, Dressing Table and Chairs, Bed, Cheval,
Room Table, Chair and Rocker. Price complete, $375.00. "
We invite you to see them and see our stock on our floors. It will also be a pleasure to show you
our Bedroom Rugs and Carpets, and our exclusive stocks of Bedroom Papers, Draperies and other
decorations.
FIFTH
AND STARK
cltlsen to have relief agalnat a fraudu
lent peUtlon. This very caao la an II
luatratlon of that. The extenalve fraud
admitted In part .and proved In larger
part in this esse waa not and could not
be dlacovered within ten days after the
filing of the petition. The Secretary
of State had neither the time nor the
money nor the machinery at hand, nor
I h given th power, to Investigate
th validity of the 1J.00O and odd
namea. Th learned Attorney-General
assuming h had a duty to perform
In that regard, was equally helpless to
prevent the fraud thst was admitted
her. . . .
OfflcJal'a Aathorlty Little.
The tatut of limitations In this
stat begins to run from tb discovery
of a fraud and not from lta commls
elon. If that la ao In respect of pri
vate frauds and private litigation, by
so much th mora must It b o. where
a great political right of th popl Is
Involved.
The econd question Is stated as
follows:
"Whether th notion of the Secretary
of Stat in filing a petition is final, or
whether It can be queatloned for fraud
committed by peraona who circulated
th peUtlon or by any other person
thsn the Secretary of State, he hsvlng
no knowledgs thereof." Thi sentence
Is sesreely Intelligible, but It pro
pounds, however. the Interrogatory
"whether the action of tho Secretary In
filing a petition Is final." and suggests
that the Secretsry Is the only person
who csn thereafter question Its legality
t0"WeaUhave no doubt that the Secre
tary of State would be Justified In re
jecting a petition, not only for defects
in Its form, but for any axtnslv for
geries or fraud that he might 'coer
before filing It. But It was not the In
tention of th Legislature to Impose on
him tho duty of a court to investigate
extrinsic facts relating to petitions. It
would be lmpractlceble- for him to do
so. He cannot subpena or swear wit
nesses. He has no money PPkroPir,te
for thst purpose with which to pay
the expense of such an investigation.
In view of the many petitions that ar
filed with him. ho would not hav time
to make such an Investigation. And
vet the Legislature must have foreseen
that fraudulent and Inaufflclent peti
tions might be filed. It tharefora pro
vided for a Judicial investigation after
the petition haa been filed, with pro
cedure adapted to discover the truth
as ta the legal sufficiency of the pe
Utlon. That such an "",.
could not b safely dispensed with s
apparent from the evldenc In this
cauae. and tho result, which would
ilow from a different rule would b.
so appalling that we are not to sup
pose, that tho Legislature did not bav.
thm in contemplation. For example.
The referendum power can be exer
cised by i per cent of th legal voter,
notwithstanding S Pr cent thereof
may be content with the Leglalatlve
enactment. The result of the refer
ndum U to u.p.n th. "P-VB,ntn?f
th law to which It la applied. In thla
eaa It ha suspended appropriations
forth, support .t th. gr.at duca
tVeoal nalvralty of thi. stat. It could
ha aa legally applied to any Other ap
probation of money by th. Legl.la
tur. including that ce..ary for th.
support of th government, it Insula
tions and salarlee of lta officers. . .
Flllaar Tbomaht Jlot Flaal.
-W conclud. therefore, that the ao
tloa of th Secretary of Stat. In filing
uS5 Petition la not final, but that . the,
legal ufflolncy thereof may be
ITT-bT . court upon oompetent and
Ug" .vid'nc" andn.gal --.'
n'lude. not only matters ( form, but
the, genuineness and honesty of the
latllaVtUreS. e
Proposition 4 I whether where a pe
tition la filed In .ectlons ;
tarkerf as fradulent, fraud on the pan
of a Srcu'ator of on. secUon wll vitiate
any other secUon of th. Potion with
which be had nothing to do and th
JrXlent part I ally capable of eeg
rat on. The fault of the propo.ltloa
I. Uit It emits, as applied to thi. caae.
an wssnt'al .lenient. It omits Mr. Park
lson. W. hav. not contended and do
net oontend that fraud on the part of
a olroulator In which no other persons
participate and for which no other
person is responsible, will vlUat. any
section with which he had nothing to
do but to state th. proposlUon ao ap
nlled to this case more carefully It
would read aa follows: Whether where
a petlUon la filed) by a man who has
himself employed and paid all of th
circulator, and where he haa himself
personally swom each of the circulators
and scrutlnlxed every psge of their
petition, and where It Is admitted that
seven of these circulators swore to the
validity of 77 forged names, and
where It Is proven by plaintiff's evi
dence, and also by evidence offered by
tne defendant, that many other circu
lators awor. to th validity ef peUUona
' sjaMMe)wsaswsMsssasseSMe
J. G. MACK & CO.
containing forgeries which must have
been known by them to be rore',.e":
and where 400 names on the petition
filed by him are admitted to have been
forged by a man who -had previously
acknowledged to him that he had pro
cured 600 forged and fictitious names
therefore, and where an Inspection of the
petitions themselves would have dis
closed extensively the'r fraudulent char
acter, then Is there any presumption of
law or fact that the balance of th pe
tition Is honest and genuine? And
while It is not necessary to our case to
maintain this proposition, still we be
l'eve It Is a sound one that auch a pre
sumption cannot be Indulged and that
the whole petition, under such circum
stances, should be rejected unless the
presumption of fraud as to the reit Is
overcome by proof.
"The appellant In this case ap
proaches th. court with a fatal admis
sion. We mean by appellant not the
nominal appellant, but Mr. H. J. Parki
son. his confederates and allies, his
aldors and abettors. They admit that
Mr Parkison paid for 37T8 forgeries at
the' rates of 8H cents per forgery, and
filed the petition In question contain
ing these forgeries. That alone makea
a prima faci cas against this petition.
If the fact now admitted had been
known to the Secretary of State when
the petition waa offered for fling. It
would have been his undoubted duty to
reject the whole petition.. The fact that
Mr. Parkison employed th. seven cir
culator guilty of the forgeries, rlaid
them, and filed their work. Is sufficient
not only to throw the burden upon the
appellants to prove the validity of the
other name on the petition, but It
raises such a strong presumption
against the whole petition that noth
ing but tho strongest evidence In sup
port of the genuineness of the rest of
the petition is able to overcome the
presumption, and the Justifiable us
plcion against' the whole work cannot
be removed by the testimony of Mr.
Parkison. or of those persons pro
cured by him to testify. The author
and proponent and defender of a peti
tion containing nearly 4000 forgeries,
or nearly one-third of the wholo. Is
not In a position to fortify appellant's
case. ...... "
"And appellants seem to make a vlr
'tu. of the shameful admission. They
seem to plume themselves on the ad
mission, as if In some way it fortified
their case. Having agreed to exclude
the forged name they seem to invite
th court, by reason of that admission,
to presume that the rest of the petition
Is genuine and honest. They say:
" 'All fraudulent sections of th pe
tition having been eliminated, no
ground for equitable Interference re
mains.' And they assert: "Fraud must
be proved. It la never presumed and
In this casa It has not been proven.' It
Is a remarkable contention to be made.
that fraudulent practlcea strengthen
the causa of those who have perpetrat
ed them. - and that .the admisslbn of
some forgeries Is evidence of the gen
uineness of th other signatures.
"Our eontentlon la to th contrary.
W assert that th xlstnc of nearly
4000 forgsd names oa a peUtlon con
taining about 11.000, filed by the same
hand and procured by th sam man,
makes th who) petlUon void In th
absence of affirmative and sstisfactory
proof of th. genuineness of the balance.
FersT ry Proof Upheld.
"But the admission of the fraud In
this case was not voluntary. It was not
made until, over the strenuous objeo-
Deaf People
Hear Whispers
With Common-Sens Ear Drama
"Wireless Phones for th Ears"
Pot twenty year the Common-Sense
Ear Drums-toave
been giving rood hearing to
bundreda of thousands of
deaf people, and they will do
the same for all who try them.
Every condition of deafness
or defective bearing I being
K.in nd rnml. . nrh tl Ca
tarrhal DeafnessTRelaxed or Sunken Drum.
Thickened Drums, Roaring and Hissing
Sounds. Perforated or Partially Destroyed
Prums.Dnrma Wholly DestroTed.Dicharg
from Ears no matter what the cans or bow
odz standing tb cse may bo. ther is hop
of good hearing for all the afflicted deaf.
The Common-Sense Ear Drum Is mad of
a soft, sensitized material, comfortable and
( to wear. They are out of sight wbea
worn, and easily adjusted by the wearer,
t Good bearing brings cheerfulness, comfort .
and sunshine into the llf ot the lonely deaf.
Onr Free Book, which tells all. will be sent
on application. Write for it today to
WILSON EAR DRUM CO. 08)
S7I Todd Building Louisville. Kr.
Sole Agents for Berkey Sc Gay and W. K. Cowan Co.
Bedroom Furniture
Hundreds of people come to us for all their Bedroom Furniture because they have
learned that they can buy right quality at right prices.
By right quality we mean good woods, good finish and good cabinet-making and
more. We also mean beautiful and exclusive designs, and that indefinable air of
style that people who know demand in furniture.
By right prices we mean strictly competitive prices.
- I
tlon of appellants' counsel, the proof of
the forgeries was overwhelming. This
admission ought to have come sooner.
The proof of tho forgeries was open to
the appellants as well as to the re
spondent The proof was resisted by
the appellants' counsel, as the record
discloses. Not only that, but appellants
are here, seeking to uphold forgeries
as clearly proven as those admitted.
Tho analysis of the testimony concern
ing th names, above set out. must have
convinced the court of the truth of
this statement. It la, therefore, with
aomo surprise that we read In appel
lants' brief, the following statement:
Defendant's counsel have sought to of
fer all obtainable evidence, whether
tending to sustain or defeat th. peU
tlon, and have endeavored to try this
cause In all respects as though ap
pointed to Investigate the facts and
present the evidence and the law as
amicus curiae rather than as partisan
advocates 'seeking to secure a decree
for their client.'
"A paper that Is' forged In some par
ticular is a forged Instrument. This
petition Is a complete and entire thing.
The filing of It Is a single act. Its
legal efficacy, for the purposes de
signed by law, depends upon Its entire
genuineness. If the petition Is sever
able in its parts ao that the forgeries
may be separated from the genuine
parts, if any, nevertheless it Is not the
duty of the Secretary of State, nor of
respondent, nor of this court, to sep
arate the good from the bad. It Is the
duty of those who claim under the
forged paper to show. If they can, what
part of the instrument is genuine.
"Wo have proceeded further and
have proved fraud enough in addition
to that admitted In this petition to re
duce the number of genuine signatures
below that required to refer this law.
"Whatever view tho court may take
of the proposlUon that the admission
of the forgeries In this case shifts the
burden upon the appellants, we come
now to another proposition concerning
which there can be no doubt, and that
is that whenever In the proof It Is
shown that a circulator h.-.s been guilty
of accepUng forged or fictitious names
and of committing perjury in hi affi
davit attached to the petition, no name
depending upon his affidavit can be
counted in th absence of proof that
It Is genuine. The appllcaUon of that
principle will exclude all the names
dependent upon the affidavits of the
circulators whose names aro Included
in the table hereinbefore set forth. In
every one of these cases the honesty
of th. circulator la impeached and the
result of excluding these namea la de
cisive of th. Invalidity of the petlUon.
Whole Docimnt Held Bad.
Th. next proposition, on page four
of the appellants' brief, is as follows:
Special Sale
Slightly Used
Talking Machines
We have a few slightly tised Talking Machines, taken in as part pay
ment toward a
Victor Victrola, Edison Amberola or Columbia
Grafonola.
all thoroughly overhauled hy our expert, that we wish to sell at once.
Any reasonable terms accepted. Twelve latest Rcords of any make
free with each outfit.
$200 Machine $145 $35 Outfit $19.75
$150 Outfit ...,....$100 $25 Outfit $15.00
$75 Outfit $52 $20 Outfit ..$12.50
$50 Outfit $32 $15 Outfit $8.00
If you are thinking of getting a Phonograph Outfit, do not delay any
longer. The chance of a lifetime awaits you at
Graves Music Co.
Ill 4th St TeL A or M. 1433. Talking Machine Headquarters.
i r.ti
i
mi fairirf
; mm 1 I!
pill
Whether fraud committed, by signers
of the petition appearing on any sec
tion will - vitiate all of that section
when circulator is not In any way con
nected with the fraud and the illegal
signatures.' We have not contended
and do not contend that a fraudulent
signature where the signer has de
ceived the circulator, where he has
used the diligence required of him by
law, will vitiate the rest of the cir
culator's work. . . . We contend
that when there Is evidence from which
it may be reasonably inferred that a
false or ficUUous signature on a peti
tion Is there with the connivance and
knowledge of the circulator, then this
work and his affidavit wherever it oc
curs in tho petitions is vitiated and Im
peached. . . .
The right to petition for the refer
ence of a measure to a vote of the
people Is a very important right, but
Intended by the law to bo exercised for
the betterment of the government of
the people, and was not intended to fur
nish an opportunity for discontented or
..u.f.ii nannia tn satisfy their griev
ances against others, and where it
clearly appears, as it does In this case,
that such was the Inception of this pe
tition, and that It has been manufac
tured upon the principle of trafflo In
merchandise by ordering names In lots
of 3000 at a time for a price, and the
wholesale dealer in such transactions,
filling tho order by seeking names In
tho most questionable places in th. City
of Portland, and dealing out to sub
contractors the procurement of these
names to persons of bad repute, going
under false names, and In fact manu
facturing large portions of this peti
tion, this court ought to hesitate a
long time before allowing such a pe
tition to succeed under any circum
stances; and we submit that under the
circumstances of this case, no amount
of apology or excuse from those re
sponsible for the condition of this pe
tition can give It any appearance of a
legal petition."
Billions In Trolley Cars.
Boston Herald.
Th. American people are paying for
urban and suburban transportations ap
proximately $500,000,000 a year, says
President Brady of the Electric Rail
way Association. He further says our
electric railways are capitalized at
000.000.000. The railroads are paying
$150,000,000 a year to 225,000 employes.
Electric railways o( the United States
ar thus giving yearly support to about
800,000 people. '
An Industry which In 25 years has
grown from nothing to the figures con
tained In these statistics is one which
probably stands at the head of modern
FIFTH
AND STARK
world Industries, so far as growth i
concerned.
It is the belief of the executive offi
cers of this association that within 10
years the traffic will have doubled
that Is to say. by the year 1921 the
electrified railways will be carrying
each year 2i.nnn.non.oon passengers.
A Store Where Ladies Can Trade.
NATIONAL
WINE CO.
FAMILY LIQUOR STORE
We carry Liquors by
the barrel, bottle or case,
and, of course, have ail
brands. The difference in
people accounts for the
difference in tastes. Our
Liquors find no favor with
those who cannot appre
ciate goods of fine quality.
Each brand has been se
lected because of strength,
purity, richness and fine
flavor. Look at our prices:
National Monogram " Rye or
Bourbon Whisky,
Per gallon, $3.00; per quart, 75a
Hillwood Kentucky Bourbon,
Per gallon, $3.75; quart, $1.00.
Multnomah Pure Pennsylvania
Rye,
Per gallon, $3.75; quart, $1.00.
Pride of Kentucky Bourbon,
Per gallon, $5.00; quart, $1.25.
Pennsylvania Special Rye,
Per gallon, -$5.00; quart, $1.25.
8-Year-old Cognac Brandy,
Per gallon, $4.00; quart, $1.00.
8-Year-old Peach Brandy,
Per gallon, $5.00; quart, $1.25.
Onr Auto Delivery carries no
signs insuring no publicity on de
livery. Express prepaid on out-of-town
orders of $4.00 or over.
NATIONAL
WINE CO.
Fifth and Stark Sts., Portland, Or.
Phones, Main 6499, A 4499.