Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1912-04-04

assumed the right to enroll? 1t seems
to me that some provision should be
made for the voters of Portland. ANY
Information or advice you could give
NE | would appreciate.
Yours truly.
ROBERT E. AHERN.
April g. 1872.
Dear Nh Ahern:-
Replying to yours of the I'd inst.
would say that as | construe the law
there is no difficulty i'll the Portland
situation. So far as the provision
relative to cities of over thirty-five
thousand inhabitants is concerned
pealed by Section IS of the Primary
Election law. which provides that "Al
Acts or parts of acts inconsistent here
with, or contrary TO the provisions of
this act, are hereby repealed" Sec
ton Is of the Primary Election Law
reads in part as follows:
~ ptISoH Siidf Nbte dl any
primary election unless a legally quail
fled voter at such voting place, as re-
quired by the preceding section, and.
in all cities and in towns of two
thousand inhabitants or more, enrolled
as qualified to vote in the caucuses of
his political party in the manner pro-
yided by the general or special laws
applicable to said cities, or any of
them or to said towns
Effect cannot be given to this sec
ton without holding that the $4,000
provision is repealed. Any other con-
struction would lead to the absurd
and unnecessary conclusion that some
$4,000 un-enrolled citizens of Portland
are prohibited from participating in
the June primaries. except by sub
seribing to an oath at the polls be-
fore the ballot clerk on primary elec-
ton day--a practical impossibility.
Such a construction would be most
decidedly inconsistent with the
Primary Election Law within the
meaning of Section % of that law.
In view of the above, it is unneces-
sary to consider your suggestion as to
the board of registration in Portland
assuming the right to enroll voters.
They could not do so in any event,
there being no statutory authority for
such a proceeding. and such an I'M
authorized enrolment would simply be
void and nuliity, comforting no rights
upon the voters enrolled
l have assumed in the foregoing that
there is no special law governing en-
rollment in Portland. If there is any
such it would prevail, unless inconsis-
tent with the Primary Election Law
(See r. S. CHI 6, Sec. 112.)
If I am right in my contentious. the
result is that enrolment in Portland
should proceed in the manner stated
in the leaflet enclosed herewith ] am
also enclosing an editorial on the sub
ject of enrolment, which appeared in
this mornings Daily kennebec Jour
nal
The foregoing may perhaps serve as
an answer to the suggestions of the
party whose communication to the
Portland Press was published in an
editorial of that paper this morning.
In the course of that editorial the
Press says:
1T would seem to follow that the
enrolment must be fresh and entire
| from top to bottom. and without help
from any previous enrolment"
l do not understand just what tile
Press means by previous enrolment
| If it means enrolment under some
| special statute applicable to the city
of Portland then, if that statute is not
inconsistent with the Primary Election
Law, such enrolment would stand.
| and enable the party enrolled to vote
at the June primaries. (See h. S. CHI,
| 6, Sec. liz, and Section Is of Primary
| Election Law But from all that has
| appeared upon the subject l have as
| snmed without investigation that
/ Portland has no such special statute
| In that event. | further assume that
there may have been no enrollments
| heretofore under the provisions OF
Section 1872 of Chapter of the Revised