Belding banner. (Belding, Mich.) 1889-1918, 1908-10-01
BRADLEY LOSES
on ALL POINTS
MAY RECOUNT SAYS COURT, BUT
NOT INVESTIGATE THE
ENROLMENT.
so WARNER is NOMINEE
Governors Request Is Granted, Only
McAlvay Dissents From the Decl-
sions Made.

The supreme court at noon Monday
denied the petition of Auditor General
Bradley asking that the state canvass
ing board be ordered to go behind the
returns and investigate the enroll
ment. The court upheld the primary
law as constitutional and granted the
petition of the attorneys for Gov.
Warner, asking that the canvassing
board be prevented from drawing out
ballots as in the case of oliver town
ship, Huron county. The decision is a
victory for all the contentious made
by the counsel OF Gov. Warner.
The opinion is signed by all the
justices OF the supreme court with
only Justice McAlvay dissenting. The
court rules that the state board of
canvassers has no right to do more
than recount the ballots cast at pri-
mary election, have no right to COM
pare enrolment books with poll lists
or take testimony, and had no right
to draw out ballots, as was the case
on the recount OF the votes cast in
oliver township.
The justices state that the general
election law applies to those having
official connection with ballots cast at
primary election and in the counting
and return of votes. They are given
no more power in counting ballots
than is conferred upon election inspec.
tors.
Referring to the claim that the re-
count provision is invalid and there.
fore the entire act Is rendered inoper.
OF h. -
holds that even IL the primary act
had no recount provision II would still
be valid.
The state canvassing board, the
court holds, Is a constitutional body
but performs statutory duties on au
thority derived from the legislature
The board is not merely political and
its duties must be performed Neither
OF the applicants for the writs. the
court continues, occupies the position
of public officer. And quo warrantC
proceedings would not be proper.
The recount will be taken up again
Wednesday and will then be rushed
to completion. Attorney Watts s
Humphrey, for DR.. Bradley, after
perusing the supreme court decision
said that ii would not be permitted to
interfere with their plans, and that
DR.. Bradley would insist that the re-
count continue.
In their Interpretation of recount
the court says 1t means another count
and no more. The act is not ambig
uous, gives protection to the agrieved
but does not provide for more than d
mere recount of ballots cast
In commenting on the action taken
in the examination of ballots cast III
| Oliver township the court sustains
the protest of Gov. Warmers attorneys
and states that votes cannot be drawn
out except when the ballots in boz
exceed the number cast Inspection
cannot go beyond the poll lists and
ballots cast in their count and the
board had no more authority.
The enrolment book to the primary
is what the registration is to election
and neither can be revised during a
count or at an election The board
therefore acted beyond it's powers in
consulting the enrolment hooks. sc
the court sums up.
In his dissenting opinion Justice Nc
Away holds the party enrolment is
the basis for determining the party
vote, but the other justices contend 40
per cent of the lawful votes is the
rue basis