Telegram-herald., 1891-03-22


Mich gan legislative history, is the re-
fusAi Dy the Republicans IN lso5 10 al
los certain Democratic Senators - take
Their seats. although they appeared
with certificates OF election. Those
certificates had been granted by Demo
cratic boards OF eanyaseers, who pre-
suned 10 foEestai! the supreme Court
n passing upon the act OF 1854, 10 per-
nit soldiers al ths front 20 vote. Al
that time the two houses did not
organize as al present. Under the ACT
poses Of organization only the names
certified % the secretary and clerk by
tile secretary OF State, leaving contests
to be settled after organization. But
IN 1885 each house had the right.
wblca had come down through years
OF precedent and practice, TO pass upon
It's roll call at once. Certain Republi-
cans appeared AT the opening OF the
session, with proofs showing that, by E
count OF the soldiers vote, they had
clear majority over the Democrats who
held the certificates. The only point
IN the case was whether tho soldiers
votes should Do recognized, the facts
being disputed by no one, not even the
Democrats.
Now what did the Senate do? The
statute OF 1861 authorized the soldiers
votes. That statute had been passed
alter careful consideration. Itwas pre-
pared IN the session of 1868, and
a: that time, Attorney General VII
lIiams pronounced it constitutional
and his opinion - published at
length IN the documents of that
session. The Senate Committee, how
ever, had doubts and reported
against the bill. TWAS not passed then,
but was passed in 1864, and the soldiers
At the front were given the benefit Of
the doubt. When the Legislature con-
vened on January 4, 1865. the eonstitu-
tonallty of the law was still in question,
the case OF People v. Blodgett (l3 Mich,
l27l, then pending in the Supreme
Court. The Senate, recognizing the in
justice OF cisfranchising tho brave boys
At the front, under the strict provis-
ions of the constitution which the Sem
ate committee afterward remarked was
inadequate TO meet the emergencies of
the times, falling back upon princi-
pies OF justice broader than the constl-
tuition. and having the constitutional
right to pass upon the election of its
own members, placed the names of the
Republicans, who mad majority vote
OF the residents of their districts, upon
the roll-call and left tine Democrats to
make their contest.
Afterward, on January Is, the case
of People v. Blodgett was argued in the
Supreme Court, and on the 2Sth the
decision was handed down. That de-
cision pronounced the soldiers vote
void, although the constitution says:
"No elector shall be deemed to have
gained or lost a residence by reason Of
his being employed IN the service OF
the United States" the decision being
based on q construction of the con-
stitution that the ballot must he actu-
ally cast in the township or ward where
the voter resides. The constitution
nowhere requires that. but the Supreme
Court unearthed one of those "neces-
sary implications, that no one else
has any right to question. The SOL
diers having been DISTINGUISHED by one
of those cold-blooded technicalitIes,
that always foster injustice. the Senate
refused TO reconsider and received its
action. The House took similar action
and left the member elected Ivy the SOL
dlers' votes unmolestcd IN the seats.
Now for the sequel. At the same
session of the Legislature joint reso-
luton was adopted. proposing an
amendment to the constitution to test
the opinions of the people on the ques-
ton. Amendments could not be sub
mitted ut spring election then, as now,
and it was not until the regular State
election of 1865, that the people spoke.
They then added the present proviso
to section I, of article Z. of the consti-
tuition, which prevents the disfran-
chlsement of its bravest citizens. And
later, the constitutionslity of An act
passed IN 1865, by the votes of the men,
bers elected by the soldiers votes. was
attacked in the Supreme court. In
/ the case of Flint & r. P. K. Co. vs..
Woodruff, y Mich, %, the right of
each house to pass upon its member
ship IN this case was recognized, al
though the anomaly was presented of
on department. declaring consti tu-
tional what another had declared un-
constitutional.
Betwes the Republican action in
1855 and the Democratic action in 1891
comparisons are odfous" to the De-
mocracy. The Republican party stood
boldly by its action and was justified by
th people The Democrats have made
their ungodly steal an issue and il will
soon he Known whether the people will
/ Justify them. They have received out
rebuke already. The House declared
the vote OF Cummins township good
I -,