Opinion by
This is аn appeal from the discharge of a rule to permit the filing of an election contest nunc, pro tunc.
Kelly and Beattie were rival candidates for thе office of tax collector of Horsham Township, Montgomery County, аt an election held November 6, 1945. Returns by the township district election boаrd to the county board of elections certified that Beattie had rеceived 321 votes and Kelly 304 votes. The county board issued a certificаte of election to Beattie. On December 12, 1945, 36 days after the election, a petition was filed in the court below for a recount, which was granted. On a recount each candidate was found to have reсeived 308 votes. There were 9 military votes, not counted by the recount bоard, but which originally had been found by the county board to be divided as follows: 3 vоtes for Beattie and 6 votes for Kelly. It was then apparent that Kelly had received 314 and Beattie 311 legal votes. On December 22, 1945,— 46 days after the еlection and 26 days after the statutory period for filing an election аppeal had expired — a *62 petition was presented for a rulе to show cause why an appeal should not be permitted to be filеd nunc pro tuno. Upon answer filed the rule was discharged in an opinion by Judge Corson. This appeal followed.
We are in complete accord with the opinion and order of the court below. Elections and their regulations are exclusively for the legislature:
Thompson v. Morrison,
*63
Appellant refers to
Koch Election Contest Case,
Appellant failed to comply with the provisions of the elеction code, and thereby lost her opportunity to contest the election.
The order of the court below is affirmed at appellant’s cost.
