Show THE PTITJONER ROA TED Their Allegations Against Cohen Were Scandalous MAGNIFIES HIS OFFICE CHAIRMAN JAMES NOT MONARCH OF ALL HE SURVEYS Chief Justice Merritt Denies the Writ of Mandate The Petitioners Offered Not n Scintilla of Evidence The Right of Franchise Is a Personal Right and Cannot Be Delegated By One Man to Another The Petitioners Did Not Make a Ghost of a Case The hearing on the second petition for a writ of mandate to compel Registrar Cohen to allow the county Republican committee to examine the registration lists was commenced yesterday forenoon before Chief Justice Merritt The defendant defend-ant put in a general demurrer and the answer in substance was the same as that put in on Wednesday to the first petition The defendant denied that he refused to allow an inspection of the registration registra-tion lists for the reason that it was his design or purpose to omit therefrom the names of any number of qualified voters of the county He also denied that it would be impracticable for any of the petitioners to visit in person the defendants defend-ants office to inspect said registration lists In order to determine whether the name of such voter had been omitted or that unless Rognon one of the petitioners tioners was allowed to inspect the lists for plaintiffs a large or any number of the qualified voters of Salt Lake county would be deprived of the right to vote at the ensuing election by reason of the alleged unlawful or fraudulent or any acts of the defendant IRRELEVANT TESTIMONY Chairman James of the Republican committee and John Axton were put upon the stand for the petitioners The testimony of the former was about the same as given on the previous day and only amounted to the fact that he considered con-sidered he had as chairman of the Republican Re-publican committee the right to examine the lists Axtons testimony was objected to for the reason that it did not tend to prove any issue The petitioners had a number num-ber of other witnesses but they were ruled out because they knew nothing relevant re-levant to the matter in hand After listening lis-tening to the arguments Judge Merritt delivered his decision as follows WRIT OF MANDATE DENIED I have listened to this case with a great deal of attention I must remark first that the evidence of the complainants complain-ants m this case has fallen very far short of their high sounding manifestoes This man Cohen the registrar is presumably pre-sumably a reputable man Complainants have brought in a whole parcel of charges which are not supported by a scintilla of evidence nct a single attempt at-tempt to support them things are charged charg-ed against him that are scandalous and i I may say libelous They come into court and make charges against the registrar reg-istrar affecting his character and his integrity in-tegrity charges that if true would subject sub-ject him to imprisonment in the penitentiary peniten-tiary and making those charges and heralding her-alding them abroad and placing them on the records of this court they do not attempt to offer a scintilla of evidence in support of them The argument of counsel has not the support of any testimony Statements are made in argument that certain testimony tes-timony is given which in fact was not offered One statement was made that Cohen the registrar said he would give 1 a list of the names upon the order of the Democratic central committee or some committee but no attempt has been made and no offer has been made to prove or show any such state of fact Mr James says he is chairman of the county Republican committee I think this gentleman magnifies his office greatly great-ly when he says he has charge and control con-trol of that great party He is an officer unknown to the law he cannot speak for the whole Republican party any more than I could if I was chairman of the Democratic central committee speak for the whole Democratic party of Utah territory ter-ritory Coming to the second case Here the judge quoted the territorial statutes in reference to the Issuance of the writ of mandamus The statute further provides that any man who is a citizen and is entitled to register may go at any time and see if his name has been omitted and if It has been have it placed on the rolls within the time provided by law he has a right to go there and inspect the rolls and see if he has been properly registered and see whether or not he is in a situation to exercise the elective franchise The elective elec-tive franchise is a very high privilege in this countr but it is a great deal prostituted pros-tituted in this great government of ours and is often exercised by many unworthy men But it is a personal privilege and cannot be delegated by one man to another an-other therefore I say that in this second sec-ond case these men have no right to delegate to Mr Rognon the right to go there and make this insnection of the rolls for them Here they nave a verified complaint saying that business men have not got time to see whether or not they have been omitted from the rolls and have not time to see that theirn ames are placed on the list I is a singular thing I know when I returned from Alaska although I was very busy I went and saw whether I was registered I thought it was my duty if I desired to exercise the highest privilege of an American Amer-ican citizen to KO there and see I I was registered I is singular that any man can swear that that burden is too great geat to be imposed upon the business men of Salt Lake city The court cannot credit such a statement Because a man swears to it does not make i true it must be consistent with common sense and common com-mon experience In my opinion complainants have not made a ghost of I case and I therefore deny the writ On application of Judge Powers the costs were taxed to the petitioners I |