New-York tribune., 1891-05-25
THE MICHIGAN ELECTORS.
CONSTITUTIONALLTY OF THE MINER LAW
DISPUTED.
AN ARGUMENT BY THE FORMER ATTORNEY.
GENERAL OF THE STATE AGAINST THE
CHOOSING OF PRESIDENTIAL
ELECTORS BY DISTRICTS.

CHOOSING OF PRESIDENTIAL
ELECTORS BY DISTRICTS.
To the Editor Of The Tribune.
Sir: The Tribune Is quoted upon the Miner Electoral
bill for Michigan saying Nobody can doubt that
this method OF choosing electors is constitutional II
legally adopted. Moreover, some plausible arguments
have made fh its favor and notably this, that 10
tends 10 bring the choice Of President little nearer to
the people,"
There Is serious doubt, think, Of the constitution
atty of this provision In the light Of the ordinary
rules Of constitutional construction adopted by the
courts such at least, Is the opinion of some OF the
best lawyers OF Michigan.
Paragraph OF section l. Article II, Of the Federal
Constitution reads: Each State shall appoint, in
such manner as the Legislature thereof may direct,
number of electors equal to the whole number OF
Senators and Representatives to which the State may
be entitled In Congress- The construction to be placed
upon the words each State shall appoint Is VITAL as
II II Is the State whole which Is TO appoint, hen
the exercise of this prerogave by the whole State can
not be curtaed by the Legislature, as the power OF
such body is limited directing the manner In which
the State as whole, shall act In making appoint
ment OF Presidential electors Any attempted trans
fer of this power 10 portion OF the state even as 10
the election of one electOr, Is violation OF the con
stitution the withdrawal from the entire Stae Oh
authority directly conferred by the constitution Under
the practical construction placed upon this clause an
nv the State and an appointment or election by the
LEGISLATURE representing the entire State, Is un-
doubtedly the equivalent Of State action.
So wa can saw that an election by the people OF the
State is an appointment by the state, and likewise an
election by the Legislature This power 70 appoih'
extends to the entire State and to all Oh tne eeo.ors
therein. and no part of the state or OF the voters
h,n are N he limited as far it's their influence
ones IN the appointment of any less than the enore
numbe of electors to which the particular State may be
entitled. 49,, -,
II this Is not the correct construction OF ths cuse
and the legislative discretion TO direct the manner Ill
which Presidential electors may be appointed is con-
trued 10 authorize 1t TO direct appointment OF any
of these electors to which State may be entitled by
Iess than the entire state then II would seem to follow
that IL NAV 20 still further, and direct that al OF uhe
same sSsuld be appointed by some particular eoouoh
or part of the State. In principle, the nght Oh al
eIector or of portion of State can be deprived Oh
the privilege Of aiding in the appointment Oh eieVe
Presidential electors by the Legislature the same RUE
,voud II carried out prevent him from any part
IN the appolntment or election of the twelfth
The yesting of a power in particular person OF
body by q statute constitution Is the prohOilon VI
the exercise Of such power by another.
The LEGISLATURE cannot divest itself Of power given
IL by the Constitution delegate the exercise OF the
same to a municipal body of the State This mas oeen
expressly held by the supreme Court OF the otae u
Michigan in People agt. Rordan, 73 Mich
And II follows necessarily that 1t can no moro
dIyest curtail or limit power conferred upon the
State by the Federal Constitution. The fact that the
method of exercise of the appointing or election Oh
electors by the State is given 10 the STATE LeslsaNc
does not invest such Legislature with authority to take
AWAY such right in whole or in part as the Miner
bill Of Michigan attempts to do and parcel the exercise
OF the same out particular sections of tho State
This bill after providing for the election Oh one
eector from each Congressional district draws line
through the State north to SOUTH and gives one
elector TO each part OF the state so divided
Can IL be argued with any show of pausibity that
an election by the western eastern portion OF the
State or by one Congressional district Is an election
by the State any more than an election OF an elector
by the voters OF one county
The word State" according to Bouvier and Story,
means the whole people united into one body ponuc
and the State aud the people OF the State are equV
lent expressions, II this correctly defines the term
can any power less than tho whole be correctly,
legally termed the State, and have plenary power
10 appoint or elect the Presidential elect0rsi
snppose after gerry Wandering the State as has been
DONE so that majority OF Congressional dlsrcUS arc
thought safely Democratic, and the parceIhg out Oh
one elector for each OF such districts the Legislature
had provided that the remaining two electors shouu
be appoInted or elected by tho voters Of the two
,arcest counties in the State would it be contended
that this latter provision for the two electors was an
apponment or election by the State under the Federal
Constitution
II the election by Congressional districts is state
appointment why is not that by countess
The qualified voters Of other counties have no
greater rights 10 cast their ballots for these last or
either OF these last two Presidential electors than have
the qualified electors OF Congressional districts
for the elector to be chosen by the twelfth district
The question is not one Of comparative right, as II
the election or appointment TO be made OF Presidential
electors from state is by the State as unit then
withdrawal OF the exercise OF such authority from any
portion of the state TO any one OF such electors
and the delegation of the same TO another part OF the
State is clearly unconstitutional.
Judge Thomas NJ Cooley, the lustre OF whose fame
as a lurist and lawwriter is not dimmed by that OF
any other In this broad land, in his work on "Consu
tutional Limitations uses this language Where the
sovereign power Of State has located the authority
there Il must remain and by the constitutional agency
alone the laws must be made until the Constitution
itself is changed
"The power 10 whom judgment, wisdom and pa
trotism, this high prerogative, has been intrusted
cannot relieve itself Of ths responsibility by choosing
other agencies, upon which tile power shall be de
and patriotism OF any other body for those which
alone the people have seen ht to confide this SOW
areign trust" Page 117)
This particular point has never been raised and |
PASSED upon by the courts but II Is argued, because
In three or four States out Of many Presidential |
electors at times elected reported 10 the Legs
latue by Congressional districts this conclnsivey es
- ~ lxAt "a anA inAAa lAOa