The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1893-05-13

opinion ON che South Kingstown elec-
tion case, and its decision will Of course
be final.
1t is curious to note how different 10
the construction given the words OF q
statute by trained and learned jurists
from that placed on it by the lay mind.
| To one not versed in the law. and whose
only guide il common sense, 1t would
appear that the position taken by Mr..
Bosworth, the counsel for the Republic
cans In the mandamus proceedings. is
the proper and legal one.
The facts In the case are easily under
stood. At the state election there was no
choice for senator or representative In
South Kingstown and the town council
ordered another election to take place
more than three days after the first trial.
This, the Republicans claimed. was lle-
gal, because 1t violated chapter 923 OF the
public laws. which provides that In case OF
a failure to elect the meeting
should stand adjourned Ito the
third day next from and after"
the day appointed for the first
election, except when the third day
should fall on a Sunday or a holiday.
In that event the adjournment was to be
until Monday or the day following the
holiday. A special exception was also
made In the case OF the town OF Hopkin-
ton. providing that should the third day
fall on Saturday the adjournment was
to be until Monday. This exception was
made because In the town Of hopkinton
there are many Seventh Day Baptists
with whom Saturday Is a day OF wor-
ship.
The second election was held, how
ever. and like the first resulted in no
choice. The town council, conceivinR
that the law was as claimed by the Re
publicans, declined to order another
trial. Then the d emocrats came for
ward with their mandamus petition,
urging that chapter 923, although a gen
eral law and applying, as expressly
stated in it. to all cities except Provi-
dence aud all towns divided into voting
districts, did not reach South Kings
town, because In the act setting of the
district OF N~arragansett there was a
CLAUSE providing for an adjourne d elec-
AfC w NC bOii hoo Nv shoA hSa etJ'
subsequent to the first trial.
This law was passed March 20, 1885,
Three years later the general law which
provided for Fdjournmsnts to not more
than three days, except in the cases OF
SATURDAYS. Sund Us and holidays AS pre-
viously explained, WIS passed. Now, to
the Law mind it would appear that this
law. passed in 1891, repealed the law
passed in 1883. because liza the
sion that ''all acts aud parts OF
acts Inconsistent herewith are hereby re-
pealed." Certainly the ten days adjourn
ment in the earlier law was inconsistent
with the three d ay ADJOURNMENT provld
ed for in the subsequent statute, and the
common sense-no the legal-view OF 1t
would be that the first was repealed be-
yond question or quihble by the second.
But the supreme court says this is not
so, and decides tina the old law, with its
ten-day adjournment provisions, is still
in full force and effect. Still more is one
not trained to the subtleties Of legal dis
tinctions i'm pressed with his utter ina
bility TO estimate the meaning and value
o familiar " ords used in a statute when
he takes arot her step in this very inter-
esting South Kingstown case.
1t will be remembered that the court
decided thai the law OF 1891 did not re-
peal the law Of 1883. Now the law OF
1888 has this provision "If no election
shall nave been made of senator and
representative in the general assembly
or of either Of them upon the day APP
poin ted by law for any election. the said
town council hall order n new election
to be held not more han ten days from
the first election, and so on until the cleo
ton shall be completed"
Again. to the lay mind th is provision
would appear to be clearly and beyond
any question invalid. because it is repug-
nant to the specific rule laid down in the
constitution of the state.
Section B of article VIII of the consti-
tuition says: "The ballots for senator's
and representatives In the several towns
shall in each case, after the polls are
declared to be closed. be counted by
the moderator, who shall announce the
result, and the clerk shall give
CeTtincdtcs 10 VIE perSOuS electdu. ~,
in any case, there be no el~ectian. the
polls NAV be re-opened aud the like pro-
ceedings had until an election shall take
place; Provtded, however. that an adj
journment or adjournments of the cleo
tion may be made to a time not exceed
ing seven days from the first meeting"
What il the meaning, what is the sig
nificance of this last clause to the mind
of any pers or of average intelligence ?
Is 1t not that in every town in the state
all elections ~subquont to the first must
be held within seven days. and hat il
there is no choice at the expira ton of
the seven days no further trials can be
made II that was not the intention Of
the trainers of the constitution, why in
| the name of common sense was such a
provision inserted at ALP Here the limit of
time Is fixed. The polls may be imme-
diately reopened, or an adjournment
,~ou no r,ada from dav "a hav until N