The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1872-08-30
0heGttdLfqenesr.
The Senatorial Complication In this
District,


Schedule aud Constitution ratified last
Thurdsy, some perpleIing questions sur.
round the choice Of Senators In this dis
trct Some Of them were suggested by
a correspondent day OF two since but
there are others hO did not touch upon.
The Schedule provides that the result Of
the election for officers shall be ascer-
,ained, determined and certified accord
lag 70 the provisions Of existing laws"-
with exceptions that do not apply to the
present case. Among those "existing
laws" ia the following (sec. 90, Chap. 3,
Code respecting the election Of Senators
10 any election for Senator, or delegate
Tor a district, II a person bo voted for on
any ballot who Is not resilen, Of the
proper county, as required by tho I,h and
llih sections Of the 4th article Of the Con.
stituIion, the ballot shall not be counted
Tor the said office" It's provided in the
new Constitution that every district shall
elect two Senators; but where the dis.
Irct is composed Of moro than one county,
both shall not be chosen from one county"
In this district the two candidates receiy-
ing the highest vote are residents OF this
county; and under the provision last
quoted II Is held that both are not chosen.
It Is said that many Of the ballots depos.
tied contained the names Of both these
candidates and the question is mooted
whether, under the provisions OF the
Schedule and Code above quoted, such
ballots should be counted as to Senator, it
being presumed If they were not counted
twould alter the result in the district.
The circumstances appear to give this
provision OF the Code peculiar effect
The person Is to be u resident Of the
proper county as defined by certain pro.
vision OF the old Constitution, which is,
that "dtter he first election both Sen.
ators shall not be chosen from the
same county" Under this provision of
tho Code, then, as applied to the present
case by the Schedule, both Senators shall
not be chosen from the same county "after
the first election" Now, whether there
is such n connection and dependence be.
tween the Schedule, the Code and that
provision Of the old constitution which
appears to be applied Rs part of the Code,
rs To make this first election" in the
sense that it is TO be excepted from the
provision Of the new constitution forbid.
ding choice OF two Senators from one
county, is question that Is merely sug.
gestcd for the consideration Of the legal
profession. The reason Of that provision
Of the Code iavors that idea. Il was cvi.
IDENTIFY meant to apply only to the ordina-
ry case where but one Senator is elected. |
Its application then is easy. II is simply |
10 reject any vote cast for resident OF
the same county US the sitting Senator.
1t cannot be applied where two are to be-
elected for tho voter may vote for two
persons; one Of them may properly re-
ccivc his vote, and there Is no authority |
anywhere to dictate to him which he lhall
vote for or which shall receive his vote
The question which is the eligible person
is one that cannot be decided by any per.
son, before The election oraitcrward. The
idea that this provision can apply only
where one Senator is chosen is strengthen.
cd by the language "in any election for
%nator'-not Senators. No provision Of
law that We are aware Of will reach the
case. That directing that where two
names are voted for for an Office the first
ahall be counted, will not apply; because
two is not more than the proper number
Of names for the office, ind the voter
would lose one vote, while the intent Of
the law is that he shall have one vote for
each officer to be chosen and no more
Nor would it he admissible to make
eligibility depend on the number of votes
received, as between the two. because, it
no other reason existed, the question what
is 10 be done with the ballot is one to he
decided by the election officers as their
count progresses and before ii can he
known which of the two has the largest
vote.
There seems to be reason, therefore, for
saying this provision Of the Code will not
apply to the present case, unless it be to
treat it as "a first election and allow two
Senators this time to como from one coun.
ty, As each of the Ohio county candi.
dates had larger vote than either OF the
Others that construction would give this
county both Senators.
But irthis provision of the Code should
be held to have this effect, would 1t not
still have to be held unnulcd because in
conflict with that express provision of the
new Constitution quoted iorbidd.ng the
choice OF two Senators from one county
and making no exception OF first cleo.
tion' liso, it would seem simply that
the provision ofthc Code cAnno, apply to
the case in hand; and II not, il must be
held, we think, that the candidate having
the highest vote IS one Senator; the candi.
date having the next highest clnno. ba
the other because ofthc express constiu.
'ional prohibition; and that tue one Of the
remaining candidates having tue largcat
vote becomes the other Senator.
We are not advised that there is any
purpose TO make contest; but should
there be one, these questions will have to