Hawkes v. Gates

28 A.2d 50, 129 N.J.L. 5, 1942 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 74
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedAugust 28, 1942
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 28 A.2d 50 (Hawkes v. Gates) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Hawkes v. Gates, 28 A.2d 50, 129 N.J.L. 5, 1942 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 74 (N.J. 1942).

Opinion

Colie, J.

Albert W. Hawkes, a Republican candidate for nomination for the office of United States Senator for Yew Jersey in the primary election to be held on September 15th, 1942, has been allowed a rule to show cause why “the draw *6 ing of the names of the several candidats for the nomination in the Republican Primary” and the order “providing for the arrangement of the said names on the primary ballot of the Republican Party (should not) be set aside” and further “that a writ of mandamus out of and under the seal of this Court be issued, or an order be made by this Court, directing and requiring that Russell C. Gates as County Clerk of the County of Essex, or Arthur Tench, as Deputy Clerk of said County, conduct a new drawing of the names of the candidates for the Republican Nomination to the office of United States Senator, in which cards for each of the several candidates, including Gill Robb Wilson be placed in the box, and that the candidates be placed on the primary Republican ballot in the order in which their names be drawn, or that the said Russell C. Gates or Arthur Tench be directed and required to first place the names of the several candidates for nomination of United' States Senator on the Republican Primary Ballot on separate lines in the order in which the names were drawn on August 13th, 1942, as hereinbefore set forth, and that thereafter the candidates for the subordinate offices including the bracketed groups hereinbefore referred to, be placd upon the ballot in the order of the drawing of their names as required by the Statute” or, in the alternative, that a writ of certiorari issue to review the aforementioned proceedings and order.

Relator, Albert W. Hawkes, together with Franklin W. Kielb, George O. Pullen, Joseph A. Bower, George Biehl and Gill Eobb Wilson are all candidates for the Republican nomination for United States Senator for the State of New Jersey.

A faction of the Eepubliean party has filed a joint petition on behalf of its. candidates for the sixteen county offices to be filled. This group petitioned requesting that it be bracketed together under the designation “Clean Government Eepubliean.” Another faction of the Eepubliean party has taken the same course but under the designation “Eepubliean Smash Bossism.” Gill Eobb Wilson has adopted the slogan of -“Eepubliean — United War Effort.” Mr. Wilson, whose *7 petition is filed with the Secretary of State, has requested that his name be placed on the same line of the voting-machine with those who filed a joint petition and chose the designation or slogan of “Clean Government Republican.” The request was consented to by the campaign manager of that group. Cf. R. S. 19:49-2.

On August 13th, 1942, the defendant Arthur Tench, deputy to Russell C. Gates, county clerk of Essex County, also a defendant, proceeded to draw for the positions of the candidates on the Republican primary ballot. The procedure which he adopted was to place in a box a card bearing the name of Dominic A. Cavicchia and a card bearing the name of John J. Berry, Jr., as respectively representing the two bracketed groups of “Clean Government Republican” and “Republican Smash Bossism.” The deputy then drew forth a card which bore Mr. Cavicehia’s name; the next card drawn bore Mr. Berry’s name. The announcement was then made by the deputy that the group bracketed under the slogan “Republican Smash Bossism” would be placed on the first line of the ballot; the group bracketed under the slogan “Clean Government Republican” on the second line. The deputy then placed the name of each candidate for United States Senator on a card, excepting that no card bearing Mr. Wilson’s name was included, placed the five cards in the box and drew them forth in the following order: 1, George Biehl; 2, Albert W. Hawkes; 3, Franklin W. Kielb; 4, George O. Pullen; 5, Joseph A. Bowers. The affidavit of J. Branton Wallace states: “That Arthur Tench then declared that the candidates for nomination in the Republican primary would be arranged on the ballot as follows:

“First Line: Republican Smash Bossism.

Second Line: Clean Government Republican — including Gill Robb Wilson.

Third Lino: George Biehl, Albert W. Hawkes and Franklin W. Kielb.

Fourth Line: George O. Pullen and Joseph A. Bowers.”

The statutes that apply to this situation are set forth below (as amended Pamph. L. 1942, ch. 50) :

*8 “19:23-24. Drawing for positions on primary ballots; procedure; certification. The position which the candidates, and bracketed groups of names of candidates for the primary for the general election shall have upon the primary election ballots, in the case of candidates for nomination for members pi the United States senate; governor; members of the house of representatives; members of the state senate; members of the general assembly; choice for president; delegates and alternates at large to the national conventions of political parties; district delegates and alternates to conventions of political parties; candidates for party position; and county offices or party positions which are to be voted for by the voters of the entire county or a portion thereof greater than a single municipality including a congressional district which is wholly within a single municipality, shall be determined by the county clerks in their respective counties; and, excepting in counties where section 19 :49-2 of the Revised Statutes applies, the position on the primary ballots in the case of candidates for nomination for office or party position wherein the candidates for office or party position to be filled are to be voted for by the voters of a municipality only, or a subdivision thereof (excepting in the case of members of the house of repi’esentatives) shall be determined by the municipal clerk in such municipalities, in the following manner: The county clerk, or his deputy, or the municipal clerk or his deputy, as the case may be, shall at his office on the thirty-third day prior to the primary election at three o’clock in the afternoon, draw from the box, as hereinafter described, each card separately without knowledge on his part as to which card he is drawing. Any legal voter of the county or municipality, as the case may be, shall have the privilege of witnessing such drawing. The person, making the drawing shall make public announcement at the drawing of each name, the order in which same is drawn, and the office for which the drawing is made. When there is to be but one person nominated for the office, the names of the several candidates who have filed petitions for such. office shall be written upon cards (one name on a card) of the same size, *9 substance and thickness. The cards shall be deposited in a box with an aperture in the cover of sufficient size to admit a man’s hand. The box shall be well shaken and turned over to thoroughly mix the cards, and the cards shall then be withdrawn one at a time. The first name drawn shall have first place, the second name drawn, second place, and so on; the order of the withdrawal of the cards from the box determining the order of arrangement in which the names shall appear upon the primary election ballot.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Quaremba v. Allan
334 A.2d 321 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1975)
Lepre v. Caputo
328 A.2d 650 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1974)
Giuliano v. Reichenstein
266 A.2d 154 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1970)
Moskowitz v. Grogan
243 A.2d 280 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1968)
Farrington v. Falcey
233 A.2d 185 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1967)
Axtell v. Caputo
204 A.2d 7 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1964)
Perry v. Giuliano
135 A.2d 24 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1957)
Harrison v. Jones
130 A.2d 887 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1957)
Switz v. Township of Middletown
130 A.2d 15 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1957)
Simon v. Graham Bakery
105 A.2d 877 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1954)
Bado v. Gilfert
80 A.2d 564 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1951)
Matter of Application of Earl
28 A.2d 54 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1942)
Matter of Application of Biehl
28 A.2d 53 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1942)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
28 A.2d 50, 129 N.J.L. 5, 1942 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 74, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hawkes-v-gates-nj-1942.