The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1893-03-08

II WWTV G7IUT dTUWJ, UI3lI
berS whose rights are to DO determined be
| Ing excluded. constitute the judicial trI
bunal for the decision or all questions o.
this nature.
''This subject has also received the 70
cent attention OF the supreme court oi
Nebraska In case, in which the opinion
was handed down by the supreme OouR
OF that state as late as the 17th Of Jan
uary Of the present year, upon q matter
involving the certificate of the election
Of q member Of the legislature. Tn,
Oourb SAID:
It iS contemplated that each house Of thu
| legislature shall be organized by the per
sons who are prima facle members th Oreof
1t equires no argument to prove the dis
| astrouS consequences OF q different CON
BEruction OF the constitution.
~ may add that the scenes whiol
have occurred in this capitol during the
past two weeks are sufficient foundation
foR the view OF the supreme court Of The
state OF Nebraska But more than this
Our own statutes clearly provide thai
tho lOgislature-that the Senate and the
House Of Representative when thoy
convene-Bhall in the first In
stance be constituted only OF those
members who have certificates Of cleo
ton. They provide that after an Ol0O
tion 10 held in November, speedy steps
BhSll be taken for the return Of the Oour
by can vassing boards; then the clerks
Of these boards shall make return q
the state board OF canvassers, and thSn
after certain length Of time, the stats
board OF canVassers shall make an OK.
animation Of those returns and
issue certificates to tho persons
appearing elected. More than
that. The state board OF Kansas has
been in existence for over thirty years.
II 10 recognized everywhere that
practice and usage are TO bO CON
sidered upon questions OF this
character. 1t has been the universal
practice and usage OF the Legislative
houses Of Kansas to be organized
by the admission, in the first instance
Of persons holding properly issued
certificates Of election. This has been
the practice for generation in KanSaS
Now, against this, what can be said, and
what authorities are broughtS
"a case 10 cited from Maine, and, IN
my view, with the exception Of . few
words stated in tho opinion, concur In
oil that is said by the court OK Maine
In that state, the returns were made "a
the state canvassing board. Under the
authority OF the constitution, the state
canvSSSing board submitted certain
questions to the supreme court a. tC
their duty concerning the can.
VaSs OF those returns. Under the
authority VI the constitution
the supreme court OF Maine gave
advice, which, in substance, was thai
the state board should canvass these TO-
turns as they appeared upon their face
that they were ministerial officers only
and had no authority whatever to e
back OF the returns, or to hear and ao
upon other evidence. In violation o.
the constitution OF that state, in viola
tion OF the statutes Of the state, and con
trRry to the express advice OF tht
supreme court OF the state, the boArC
Of canvassers refused to accept the
returns which appeared in the ofio'
from which they we're to issue oertih
Gates. Under such q condition o
affairs the supreme court Of the state o
Maine said that those returns were bet
ter evidence than the fraudulent csrti6
Gates issued by the state board Of can
vaspers in violation Of the constitution
in violation Of the statutes, and oontrar.
to the advice Of the supreme court o
that state.
ain this case no such thing appears
There has been offered in evidenoC
the certified list Of members who Rppea
TO have been elected Accompanying
that certificate is o statement OF the re
turns on file In the office Of the secretar
Of state, with statement OF how man,
votes each member received. Her
lat ma aav TINT whila thara hAa haaI