Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1895-09-21


Off In November. THIS cDnstTuc-
ton has been adopted by the refntot-
iai, Municipal snI Federal oiiloials
charged with Administering the cleo
ton laws. We have held one munici.
pa election In accordance herewith
AMI a session OF the legislature has lie
tervened since such election. These
circumstances with such contempor.
apeous construction are, while pei
haps not controlling, OF great weight
Ii does not TEEN 10 me necessary to
consider the provisions Of the pro.
o sed constitution. Tbat Instrument
VIII not be operative until ratified by
ihe people aud proclaimed ny the
President. The question whether n
municipal election Tor BAIT Lake City
must bo held In November, 1885, Il
TO DO determined by the present law,
the law OF the Territory. whether
PERSONS elected at suca elections
will hold their respective OF.
ices Tor longer or shorter term, or ut
all, should the State be admitted, will
depend upon the Interpretation TO be
given tho language Of the schedule,
and also (posslbly) upon the time OF
admission. Thus section 10 OF the
schedule provided that "All officers,
civil and military, now holding their
offices ana appointments In this Terri
try by authority OF law, shall continue
10 hold and exercise their respective
offices anu appointments, until super
ced.d under the Constitution"
II the existing law requires an cleo.
ton In November, and that the
officers elect shall qualify ON Jan. lst,
1885, and they do 10, and are IN onice
when tho President makes prsolamf-
ton, such offices Will be within the
very letter Of the schedule. II, on the
other hand, the proclamation shall
precodo tho fret day " January, and
the Constitution become operative, the
question Will arise whether Section 10
VI tho schedule includes municipal
oilicefs. Notwithstanding It's appnr.
emily eweeping provision, am not coz
WINGED that II dOsi. A. nll events
there are oogent reasons a Aiuet such
construction. But, as beio,o intlmatvd,
thore ~ no necessity u uotarmining
this question now. We arc only to
deal with the present law, which / SIN
constrained TO believe sCqulrte the
h ldiug OF nm election Tor municipal
{ III eefs In November ueSt.
GEORGE su1uuLAND.
You submitted to mo twl questions:
nfsi, whether or not the claim Uf cor.
ain Of the city officers thai no mum.
oipil election can be hsl5 until FgDru-
any next under the laws Of tho rerfi.
{ ~, 10 well founded; ana, second,
whether or no! In the evnut OF state
hooi the present city officers hold over
until the Slato Legislature makes some
provision iorcity olSCtinny.
J. i answer the hfsl question In the
negative. IhB claim seems to be
based upon the language Of the act OF
the Legislature Of 1909. Toe act pre-
yiIes that on TUESDAY neEt after the
nrst Monday Ia November, 1908, aud
bienially thereafter, $50 election nhall
be- held Ia eAcl city, etc., 10 hll all
ulloef, etc.
sectiun provides that nothing In
this not shall apply u cities Of tue
metropolitan class.
It Is claimed that under this latter
sCclioJ, Salt Lake CITY Il excepted
from the provisions Of the law
requiring gu election In Novem.
tvf, ls93. ani biennihlly there.
alter Tho question, therefore,
10 wat 10 mUAul by cities The
city OF the metropolitan class within
tne meaniug OF Ghls ac,, OF clutso IL IL
not Affected by tho provision OF the
law requiring elections 10 November,
aud tue olaim a TIE city ofilccis that
An election should be held Ia FsbTu.
AIRY would be well founded.
find 10 provision u the law what
ever, defining what 10 a city OF tue
metropolitan clats. Under ths laws o.
tvs Territory c.tios are divided Ihtl
first, second and third clnts. Nowhere
are oities VI the metropolitan class
spoken Of or defined. As matter Of
history, however, understand that ut
the same session OF the Legislature
which passed the act In question, n
hill was passed by both houses defia.
lug and providing for cities OF tue
o. Jiiopolitau claS. After the bill last
spoken OF passed tue legislature, II was
sent 10 the Governor, and pending hia
examination OF II, tho election act OF
1892 was passed by the Leg stature. 10
providing that the act should not Rl-
ply t. clues OF the metropolitan elias,
tho Legislature undoubtedly had In
mind Its former bill providing for such
cities. Tho act providing for metro.
politan o,lios, however, was vetoed by
the Governor.
The rule seems 10 be settled that In
arriving nj the proper meaning OF
nm act OF the Legislature, we may 70.
Ter to the history surrounding Its pas-
s'ge. Following this rule II 10
clear that the legislature excepting
cities OF the metropolitan class from
the operation OF the election law meant
such cities rs were 30 defined by the
bill which was Afterwards vetoed by
the governor. There Ia no need, there.
fore, to look beyond this for the mean
Ing Of this phrase In the election law.
As tho bill providing Tor aud defining
clties OF the metropolitan class never
became operative, II seems TO me that
the provision OF tho election law ex-
cepting cities from its operation should
fall with II. IL 10 . question OF legislR-
i've Intent. In view OF the law de-
hning cities OF the metropolitan ,class
and making various regulations and
provisions for such cities, the legisla-
ture for come reason deemed IL best to
exclude such cities 30 defined anu pro-
vldeu TOT, from this general operation OF
the election law; but 1t seems reason-
ably clear that II such n law had never
been passed TINT no such exception
would have been made. Tho legisla-
ture evidently intended To create cities
OF tue metropolitan class aud took the
first steps In that direction. These
same cities they Intended 10 exclude
from the operation OF the general elVc.