Huck

This is an election contest instituted under the provisions of section 1111 of the Code of Civil Procedure to determine whether the plaintiff or the defendant was elected to the office of director of an irrigation district organized under the provisions of the California Irrigation District Act. (Stats. 1897, p. 254, and amendments thereto.) The defendant’s demurrer to the complaint was sustained without leave to amend and judgment was entered in favor of defendant for costs. Plaintiff has appealed from the judgment.

The parties are agreed that the only question raised by the appeal is whether a contest of the right of a person declared elected to the office of director of an irrigation district is authorized by section 1111. That section provides: “Any elector of a county, city and county, city, or of any - political subdivision of either, may contest the right of any person declared elected to an office to be exercised therein.” The question is whether an irrigation district is a “political subdivision” of a county. Appellant relies on the case of Hertle v. Ball, 9 Idaho, 193 [ 72 Pac. 953 ], which held that such a contest would lie. The Idaho statute provided that “the…