The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1912-12-16
SUFFRAGE PARTY LOSES
FIRST FIGHT IN COURT
tcontInued from page oneJ


sing board, cited In the courts de
cision, was decided by the supreme
court, which held that circuit
judgeshtp is a state ONCE. and that
the Legislature alone has the right OF
recount
!. The decision OF the Wayne chancery
bench. read by Judge Hosmer, is rs
follows:
This Is a petition on the part OF the
attorney general on relation OF several
citizens OF Wayne county for a writ OF
mandamus to compel the county board
or canyassers to reject all ballots cast
at the recent election for or against
the proposed constitutional amendment
relative to the right or women TO vote
which did not bear the initials OF an
Inspector. The PROCEEDINGS show that
the board entertained petition for a
recount OF the ballots I'm a large num-
Der OF Necincts. and large proportion
OF the ballots cast were not initiated,
II Is strenuously Insisted on the part
Of the board that, the legislature did
not intend TO make the initiating OF
amendment ballots mandatory as in
cases OF ballots for the various offices.
While we do not discover any reason
which would lead the Legislature TO
make this distinction, decision Of this
point IL not essential TO a decision OF
this controversy
The first question naturally arising
Is whether the board has the power to
recount Their power must come from
the statutes. II does not come TO them
as a common law right In the exercise
of their offices.
The act creating the present board
amended. IL provides for the organi-
cation OF the board, defines its duties
creates penalties for neglect or frauds
Section 10 gives the right TO recount
A. 10 aaN
forth In the act. but nothing IL said OF
recount except by a candidate--no
hint or suggestion of the recount OF
the vote upon a constitutional amend
ment or other proposition submitted TO
the voters.
The only Language In the entire act
upon which the claim Is based that the
right 10 recount by the board OF
teenth section OF the act. which r. as
follows:
"The provisions OF this act shall APP
ply to special elections to nll vacan-
Section OF this act and all elections
at which any proposition shall be sub.
mitted to the electors OF any county"
The very obvious Intent of this Sec
tion N TO make IL certain that special
elections. ms well as general elections
are subject 10 the provisions OF this net
so far as those provisions are apple
able. IL IL a forced construction which
not the natural and ordinary meaning
OF the words used. II may be conceded
that where fraud il probable. the right
TO recount should exist but this right
must be gdiy,sE by the legislature and
legislature had desired TO extend tho
right to recount beyond the votes for
as expressed In the statute,
more unfortunate phraseology could
hardly have been found than that en-
ployed
The constitution provides Article 1s,
Section 4: when the determination OF
the board OF state eanyassers L. con-
which person Is elected" III the last
phrase were omitted, amendments
would stand on the same basis as state
officers. 4 would seem that the franz
ers Of the constitution intended to
make the legislature the ultimate ar
bitter in matters relating 20 the canvass
OF votes on state Officers and ques-
lions submitted 10 the people Of the
state, and III this be so, the case of
Pound vs. Board OF County canvassers,
100 Michigan, lS1. Is conclusive. and
any recount must come through the
Il follows, therefore. that the petition
of' - GEORGE 8. HosMER.
r. j. NJ HALLY.
GEORGE p CODD.
Although the suffrage recount cost
the county of Wayne about $500, and
gave the suffragists the Information
they wanted, they will receive back
their certified check of 500, which
they had to deposit to obtain the re.
count
, The county canvassing board net
at noon, Monday. Attorney Weadock
argued that inasmuch as the board
had had no power TO hold a recount,
Il could not have held one; cor.
scqucntly II could not have accepted
the suffragists' money Tor recount.
The board saw considerable force I'm
this reasoning, and ordered the check
returned to Mr.. weadock.
The board could not decide, how
ever, which set OF figures to return 70
az the vote on the constitu-
lional amendment. BY Judge Dur
fees advice, II was finally decided to
return two sets OF Agures--one con-
the vote as originally canvass
cd. the other the vote as recounted.
Il Will be up 70 the state canvassing
board to decide which count to accepi.
(snnoroaafnan Zlnnar ~ Clowalond