The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-09-22

but II would give rise to much contention
4 TO enumerate the chief cities. Richfleld,
Beaver and st. George and a score of
ether cities might claim to come. within
| the meaning. We cannot believe that the
legislature used the term in such loose
| indefinite and uncertain manner and this
brings US back again to the proposition
Of the law la Snow concuVey hat the p
ticular meaning given by the law which
failed of passage was the one intended by
! the legislature.
The second contention of the city Off
GERS seems TO be equally illfounded. The
schedule in the constitution provides:
section ., All laws of the territory of
| constitution, shall remain III force until
they expire by their ovn limitation or
are altered or repealed by the legislature.
section 10 provides. that all officers, civil
! and military, now holding their offices
and appointments in this territory by
authority of law, shall continue to hold
appointments until Superseded under the
constitution. Section II provides for an
election of state officers on the Tuesday
! Der, 1895. Section 70 provides who these
| officers shall be. Section Is provides that
me legislature at its first session shall
whose election is not provided for else
| where in this constitution and fix the
| time for the commencement and dura-
! ton of their terms.
These provisions. in accordance with
| well known rules, should all be construed
! together, and should be harmouized if
J possible. Taken altogether, it seems clear
TO my mind thai the constitutional con-
| Vention intended to leave all laws, includ-
! ing election laws of the territory, in force
| and operation until the legislature should
| otherwise provide.
1t was not intended to interfere with
the existing order Of things until that
time
Section 10 was inserted for the purpose
preventing
son of the change from a territorial to u
state government. In other words. it was
intended that the laws of the territory
with reference to the election of munich
pal officers and other officers should con-
tinue operative under the territorial gov
eminent until the legislature itself at the
first session should otherwise provide.
Waldemar Van Colt was quite pro-
nounced in his view, stating that his
opinion was in perfect harmony with
that expressed here by MIR. Suther-
land.
John NJ. Zane's Opinion.
Your inquiry is whether a municipal
election for Salt Lake city can be held
under the territorial law, in the coming
November.
sos, L Comp. Laws of 1888, the election
was to be neld III February, $780, and BIZ
ennially thereafter.
This provision sec. 1901, 1 Comp Laws
of 1885, does not change.
Then by sec. of act found in laws of
1892, p. 2S an election is fixed in each
city in November, 1898, and biennially
Then by sec. it is enacted that moth
ing in the act last cited shall apply to
cities of the metropolitan class. The
whole question depends upon what cities
CT the metropolitan class are, This act
IS the first enactment in Utah territory
that uses the phrase. 1t is utterly I'M
known in prior laws. The incorporation
Of tTnr not
of 1888, divides cities into first, second and
third classes. Salt Lake city is the only
city of the first class. 1t is also the
metropolitan city of Utah. but the phrase
metropolitan class does not occur in that
act at all. But a court proceeding on the
principle that all the language OF the act
must be given some meaning, II possible,
might hold that the phrase metropolita9
class meant cities of the first class, and
hence included Salt Lake city.
If this is true, no election can be held
1896. 1t would result that the last city
election held November, 1895, was unau-
thorized and that the present city coulA-
But the court would strain the Ian
guage a great deal before it would reach
such a result. A court ought to say that
this statute has been construed as ap-
plying to Salt Lake city, and elections
had been held according to that construc-
ton, officers have held under 1t Tor two
years, and the construction ought not TO
to this construction by section 3 of the
act of 1892, which expressly eXempts from
an election in November, 1892, those cities
which held elections prior to May 81, !
1892, and then provides that officers elect |
ed in November, 1892, should continue in
Office until Jan. /, 1894. Salt Lake city !
was the only city to answer the descTip- |
ton of the city holding an election in 1892
prior to May 81. Therefore if the words !
metropolitan class" means Salt Lake !
city, section 3 of the same act can have |
10 force and nearing. 1t is amazing |
that the lawyers in the legislature of 1882 !
should have reached such contradictory |
results, but such they are. On the whole |
question I think that the court ought to |
hold an election valid, held in November, |
1898, but one Judge might hold one way, |
and another might hold the exact oppo-
II this question is got over there is 10
difficulty about the officers elected being |
entitled The constitution provides that |
all civil officers shall hold until super |
seeded by officers elected under the consti-
tuition In another section it is provided |
by the constitution that the present laws
Of the territory are continued in force I'M
der the constitution. Hence it is appar-
ent that any officers elected under the !
territorial laws would be proper officers
to supersede the present inCUmbentS.
Such officers would be elected under the |
because the constitution eX-
pressly continues in force, and gives va
iidity to the laws under which such off,
GERS would be elected.