Carson City daily appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1907-1930, 1916-08-22
OPINION

This in an original proceeding in
prohibition. designed to test the con-
stitutionality OF that certain act Of
the legislature approved March 20,
lyl5, entitled, AN act regulating the
nomination OF candidates by political
parties. providing Tor the holding OF
primaries and conventions. and recu-
latine the manner OF nominating all
didates by petition.' tStats. 1918, p.
450.)
The petition in this case was Sled
July Il, 1916. and an alternative writ
issred returnable July 2Sd. The IN
pOrtance OF the case. and the short
ness OF the time allotted jor its con-
sideratiOn, caused the court to re-
quest a number Of prominent attor-
neys OF the state to appear as friends
OF the court, Tor the purpose OF Civ
ing the court the benefit OF their seV-
eral opinions, i'll order that a correct
conclusion might be reached. In
view OF the TACT that Petitioner de
layed his objections to the act until
50 short 4 time before the election
provided tor i'll the act sought to be
arnulled. and in view or the tatt that
the petition does not show that petl-
toner sought to secure any rights al
legged to be guaranteed to him and in
lringeG by the act in question,
through the medium OF authorized
representatives OF his party OF by ap-
~plication in any way to other legally
constituted authorities. this court
might wei be justified il refusing to
consider any questions presented I'M
dor ~, tr,nrlin ~ WRIT nr3 we'd tor
which writ rests in the sound dlscre-
ton Of the court.
For the purpose OF avoiding pos
Sible future litigation. the court will
determine certain OF the Contentions
made by petitioner which bear upon
his rights as a member of the Pro-
grcssive party. Certain other qucs-
tions i'll which petitioners rights are
only in common with that OF all cleo
tors generally. will not be determined
i'll this proceeding.
We may premise that we will say
in discussing the questions deemed
important to be determined or refer
red TO, by referring to the well set
tied proposition OF law that all pre-
| SYMPTOMS are i'll favor OF the cQnstl-
tutionality Of acts passed by the leg
islature, and that all reasonable
| doubts are determined i'll favor o
Legislative enactments. and that court,
have nothing to do with question:
which 60 to mere policy or eNped1
ency Of acts of the legislature. 1t /:
proper here to state that the argu
mcnts presented showed a wide dit
ference of opinion relative to the con
| stitutiOnality OF the act Ill question
both by counsel appearing for tn
parties to the proceeding and thos'
.lappearing as friends Of the court.
1t was commended, first, that tn
whole act was void because the IT'LL
contains more than n subject, II
violation of section |, OF article "
OF our constitution. We think TIL
objections to the title OF the act ar
fully answered by former decision
Of this court. particularly the case o
State V. State Bank and Trust &C
81 New. 456.)
1t is also contcnded that section
Of the act in question deprives petl
toner OF his rights as an elector an
member OF the Progressive party be
caese that section appOrtlons dele
gates to the state and county conven
tons on the basis of the vote for rep
resentative in congress at the las