Grand Rapids herald. [volume] (Grand Rapids, Mich.) 1892-1959, 1892-06-18

tE1L xzOle- kessP4e Vs. AA4at1sts 10
Nicn. 43l; kurgz vs. People 81 A.en-.
z79; Ryers On vs. Itiey. 10 MICA zsv-
fne titis % tina aes u, ~Aa aes 10
provide for the election Of electors OF
president and vice presdent or TIE
United States, aad u repeal all 0iner
acts and parts Of scts II Conflict there
WITH"
Ii = said that the holy Of the act
provides Tor the election u alternate
electors as well as electors. and that al
teEaate electors are act naaled n the
title IL would hardly Dc commended that
Il was mol competent under this title u
! provide for filling vacancies occas.oned
| by the death or disability OF one OF the
electors rirsE ehosea- rms act III eject
does no more than that. Technically
also, alternate electors are before they
become atticlals, vested with any func-
lions whatever. electors. The sole oo-
| Iect of their election = that they sns II
( IN a certain event exercise the function
OF electors. The question might be
different II they were elected 10 d dis
unct oItice, having duties to perform
| and with = provision that they should
1 have added To- these duties the Junction
| OF electors IN the event OF disability
OF their principal.
| II il also urged AZ an objection 10 the
| validity OF this law that IN case OF the
| death or disability Of both the elecior
ana alternate that no provision Is made
| for filling the vacancy and II is there
! fore claimed To be imperative. But 1t
is only necessary TO say that II this be
| true, then any attempt TO appoint
| electors would fail, for under the for
| mer statute existing IN this state and
under all statutes vesting power TO NIL
vacancies In the electoral college, death
/ might intervene and prevent the exer-
| else OF that function.
| Can the act DC said TO be imperative
| and void because so defective as that its
| provisions cannot be given etfecp 1t IS
| first claimed that the law is defective
Ia not requiring notice OF election of
| she district electors provided Tor, but
| We THINK this criticism without torcs.
| Section lat of HowelPs statutes re-
| mains in force and by the express terms
| of that statute the secretary OF state 10
| required to give notice that there are
| To be chosen az many of the following
| officers as are to bs chosen at such gen.
| eral election, namely: u governor, u.
electors or president and vice president.
| The electors provided for IN this act
are to be chosen at this general cleo
ton, and it is the plain duty of the Sec
| rotary Of state to give notice Of that
fact
1t isnext urged that the law Is defec-
tive and imperative, for the reason
that no means are provided either by
the act itself or the general law for
csnvassing votes in Wayne county.
The general law, act 100, public acts of
1891, provides, by section !, for in-
| spectors of election tor elections at
| which presidential electors may be
voted for. Section 36 provides for q
clnvass of the votes. Section 3S re-
quires duplicate statements of the re-
suit to be prepared, one copy of which
is to be filed and the other delivered to
the Inspector appointed by the board to
attend the county canvass. Section
lS4 and l85 of How. Stat. provide that
the board of canvassers shall proceed
to canvass the votes, and section 185
requires the statement of votes given
for electors of president and wee presi-
dent of the United States each year in
which such electors are to be chosen.
The act in question, in section two,
provides that, "the counting, canvass.
ing and certifying Of the votes cast for
such electors-at-large and their alter
mates and said district electors and
their alterpates shall be done, as near
as may be, as is now provided by law
for the election of electors of president
and vice president of the United
States" The precise point ap-
pears to be that as the
votes cast in the county for
the presidential electors are cast in diff.
ferent electoral districts, that there is
no provision for separate canvass OF
the votes cast in each district by the
board Of canvassers. We do not see
the least difficulty in applying the law
1t would Of course be the duty of the
inspector to designate the district in
which the elector il voted for. And a
the district 10 defined by law there 10 nc
more difficulty in doing this than there
10 in the board OF state canvassers cred
iting to the one entitled the votes casI
in the proper judicial circuit for circuit
judge.
The act in question is in conflict with
the law OF congress In so far as it at.
tempts to fix date for the meeting OF
electors and the method of certifying
their action. Does this rende. the en-.
tire act Imperative? There Is no doubt
of the rule that where the law of q
state conflicts with the law of congress
in y matter in reference to which con-
gress has the right to leglslate, the state
law must give way TO the extent of such
conflict. Robinson vs.. Rice, 3 Mich. 242
The law IL not necessarily inopera
tive IN toto because IN some of its pro
visions the legislature has exceeded its
power. On the contrary the rule II
l al 10 h.,t haf 4 ho, "a.
of one part of the statute cannot de
feat other portions unless the nature oil
the unconstitutional provision is such
as to render IT of vital Importance to
the law People Va. Mahaney, Is Mich
Ash; see also People W. Richmond, Sc
Mich. $40. Attorney General VS.. Amos
90 Mich. 372; Robinson vs.. Miner, Ct
Mich. $40.
This general rule is conceded, but i,
Is contended that this statute furnlshe;
evidence upon Its face that 1t contains
provisions which would have been
adopted had it been within the under
Standing of the legislature that the
provision relative to the date for the
meeting of electors was imperative
The statute providing as IT does that,
In case two or more persons have an
equal and the highest number of votes
cast for any Office created by this act
as canvassed by the board OF state can
vassers, the legislature in joint conven-
ton shall choose one Of said persons to
FIJI such Office, ana il snail be tue duty
of the governor TO convene the
legislature IN special session inme-
diAtely upon such determination
4 by sAId board of state cauvassers." II
I -. haf q q