The comet. (Johnson City, Tenn.) 1884-1916, 1910-11-24

requiring precisely the same notice
publication and The same initial re
quirement that the governor shall is
sue writs of election therefor. The on
ly difference is, which makes the cas-
as to a special election for congress
more exacting, that the time is fixeC
and made mandatory as to the specia
election of a judge, but none is fixed as
to the election of member in congress,
to fill vacancy.
On this point, the American anC
English Enc. of Law, I'd Ed, Vol. 10
page 62S, sets forth the following: "If q
statute not mandatory with respect to
filling the vacancy at a general cleo
tion, but merely permiSsive, failure to
give notice that the vacancy will be
filed at particular election will in
validate it )"
And again on the same page it is
said 1.-The rule applicable to general
elections does not apply in the case of
special elections to fill vacancies, the
time and place of which are not fixed
nv law
This seems to be the general doctrine,
but Tennessee has even more strin-
gent rule, making notice by the au-
thority designated properly published
an essential prerequisite to the validi-
ty of a special election. This is the
holding in the case of Barry vs.. Lauclz,
3 Coldwell, where the question involv-
ed was over the failure of the sheriff of
one of the six counties in a chancery
division to give the required notice of
a special election to elect chancellor
to fill vacancy, even when the gov
ernor had made the required proclama-
ton and issued the requisite writs of
election. 1t was held that this invali-
dated the special election under the
facts stated in the opinion.
But in this case now under consider
alton, the governor issued no procla-
nation, no writs of election, and of
course no notice or publication based
thereon appeared. What then sustains
the election here involved? Its legality
was questioned in the daily press be-
fore it was attempted to be held for
these very reasons.
But going away from the constitution
and laws of Tennessee on this subject,
let us for the moment refer to the pro.
vision on the subject in the constitu-
ton of the United States, towit, Art. l,
Sec. 2, which provides that "When
vacancies happen in the representation
from any state, the executive authority
thereof shall issue writs of election to
fill the vacancies How has this been |
interpreted and construed in election |
cases where it was directly involved?
A case is reported, Graffin, Bart.
Ell. Cas-. 464, where it was held in vir-
tue of this constitutional provision that
. The governor must fix the time for
holding an election to fill vacancy,
Ind this power can not be delegated.
IN this case it appears that the gov
,rnor of state had placed writs of
election in the hands of another person
With authority to change the date
herein in certain contingencies, which
vas so changed by this other person
md the election held at a different
ime accordingly, yet on account of
he fact that this authorized change
vas made by party not the designat-
d officer, the election was held void.
And again another case, Gholson,
Bart. Ell. Cas-. 8, where the matter of a
pecial election came under considera-
ion, involving this same constitution
] provision, it appears that where
acancies existed in states represen-
alton in the house of representatives,
nd an election was held under the
overnor's proclamation to choose rep
to serve during a special
ession of congress convened by Che :
resident, it was held that such men, {
ers were not entitled to hold office be- {
ond the special session. In other
lords, the governors proclamation
nd writs of election circumscribe and :
nit the tenure of the member-elect to
ven portion Of an unexpired term, if /
, worded and limited. II is the au-
lority and grant for the holding of
lie election, without which none can