Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1879-12-16

THE ACT OF ISL.
one OF the most remarkable portions Of
the reply OF the Council 90 the republican
protest is their statement that 1.-THE views
of the court would have great weight with
the executive department ju the discharge
OF The delicate and responsible duties now
before 10. Ordinarily the opinion .herc
spoken OF aS views OF the court aS 20
the meaning OF the constitution aud laws,
not only has weight, but control, the
action OF officials lu the discharge OF their
duties. Heretofore the accepted doctrine
has been that all laws enacted by the lcgiS-
laturc arr binding ON officials and citizens
until the supreme Court declares them I'M
constitutional Now, We have a governor
and council who coolly ASSUME the powers
OF the supreme Court. declare unCou>titu-
tional the act OF lS17, which allows returns
10 Dee corrected by the records anal having
thus set aside the law, proceed 10 deny
candidates The rights conferred by that
law
The excuse which their friends give for
this usurpation of power, Is that The gov
cruor and council believe the law plainly
conflicts with the constitution. and they
must follow the constitution rather than
the law This excuse may Doe given for
the notification of any law. Isn't it strange
that the legislature should have PASSED this
act after debate. with the unanimous con-
currchcr of both political parties, with the
approval of the able lawyers on both sides,
without a suspicion OF any conflict between
IL and the constitution, Isn't IL stranger
that the law should have been executed for
/ two years, taken advantage of 10y demo
Gratis even. without any one discovering
I that il was inconsistent with the constitu-
[ ton, Isn't il stiIl stranger that neither
the present governor nor his council, -
late 10 NaY. 23d, had discovered this
"p,aiu conflict" with the constitution
We are told that this conflict Is 20 DE
found ia the fact that the constitution re-
quirrS the governor and council to canvass
| copie. OF the lists Of votes, signed by Tie
clerk and municipal officers AMI sealed up
I In open town meeting; while the act Of
I -. requires the governor and council 70
correct errors IN these copies 50 a. 20 make
/ them agree with the record, when the clerk
/ presents evidence that he made mistake
/ i'm copying What Inconsistency : there
/ between the constitution aud the law; The
constitution provides that the returns
which are 20 De counted shall be fair
copies Of the lists Of votes. In ls1i
when there was mistake IN the return IN
/ an initial Of legislative candidate, the
governor and council asked the court Il
there was any way 10 correct the crrOne-
Gus return. The court said no, because
/ the governor aud council 'arc limited 20
/ the evidence deriyable from the returns,
etc, ,frspt .-ieu hrir p1l-srs hare been en-
/ l1rJ,i ~ statue
| This was plain intimation by the null
court that the Legislature might enlarge
the powers of the governor aud council 20
receive evidence that return is not q "idir
copy" OF the list OF votes. and correct II IN
accordance with the record. IL was this
clear iutimation of the court that soon
/ after led the Legislature 10 unanimously
pass the act OF lS.7. 70 better carry out
I the spirit Of the constitution. and the will
/ of the voters Is expressed at the polls.
More than this. For half a century there
/ has been on our Statute Book law, IN
questioned by any one and even executed
\ this very autumn by the present state
authorities, which provides that al attested
copy OF the record Of votes, signed only by
the clerk. and made out weeks after the
/ election, shall be received and counted by
I the governor and council, aS II It were an
original return when that return Is lost.
| Doesn't this law travel further outside OF
the constitution than the act of lol1: And
vet nobody ever dreamed it was uncOnsti-
tutional, and even the Supreme Court has
recognized its validity
The point which we wish to emphasize,
/ however. is that the governor and council
( are required by their oaths 20 obey the act
of ls77, Is well Us all other laws, until the
| Supreme Court declare il unconstitutional.
There is no practical difficulty in obeying
both constitution and law, for the latter
doe, not plainly conflict" with the former,
but may be reasonably construed Is simply
charging the powers Of the governor and
council 10 the end that the evident design
of the constitution that the canvass shall
be made on fair copies" of the lists of
votes, may be better carried out.