Carson City daily appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1907-1930, 1916-07-25


sumptions are in favor Of the consti-
tutionality Of acts passed by the leg
islature. and that all reasonable
doubts are determined in favor OF
lcgiS Slative enactments. and that courts
have nothing to do with questions
which go to mere policy or expcul-
ency Of acts OF the legislature. 1t is
proper here to state that the argu-
ments presented showed a wide dill
terence OF opinion relative to the con-
stitutionality OF the act in question.
both by counsel appearing for the
parties to the proceeding and those
appearing as friends OF the court
Title of Act
1t was COntcnded, first, that the
whole art was void because the title
confirms more than one subject, in
violation OF section |. OF article ",
of our constitution. We think the
objections to the title OF the act are
fully answered by former decisions
OF this court, particularly the case o.
State y. State Bank and Trust Co.
(5l New. 4S6.)
Apportionment
1t is also Contended that section :
OF the act i'll question deprives peti-
toner OF his rights as an elector and
member OF the Progress siye party be-
cause that section appOrtions dele
gates to the state and county conven-
ti0ns ON the basis Of the vote iur rep.
reSentauVe IN Congress at the last
preceding election. ard hat the partv
OF which he is a member. having had
no candidate Tor representative in
congress at such election, is therefore
deprived OF participating in the pri-
mary election. 1t is conceded that
under the provisions ri section ? o.
the act II question the Progressive
party is within the classification ot
parties entitled to the privileges of
the act III question. 1t is not alleged
IN the petition that the representa-
ewes OF the party Of which petition
er alie~cs himself to be a member :
made amy attempt to avail the1nselVe, !:
Of the privileges OF the act by com !
)ly1ns with the provisions OF section |
:. or that petitioner made any request !
ii the state and county central COM !
n1ttets ot his party to appOrtion del !
gates to the state and county con
:entlons as prescribed in such Sec |
ion, prior to the time fixed in such
tate or COUNTY central committees
Depriving Party Of Privilege /
Assuming. however, Tor the pur- I
poses OF this decision. that the rights !
# 4 party elcCt0r may not be cut off |!
~ reason OF the failure or neglect
il the duly constituted state or !
county party central committees. we !
hall consider whether the provision,
II section 3 actually have the effect
u depriving 4 political party other
wise entitled to the privileges OF the
'ct from participating in the primary
election. 1t is provided in section
g OF the act that This act shall be !
iberally construed. to the END that
he real intent Of the electors shall |
prevail. As before pointed out. sec
ion : OF the act gives the Progress
i've party the positive right to pro
,eed to elect delegates to party con
'entiOns as hereinafter provided" If
We were to assume that section 3 is
lnc0n sututional, and SO hold, such
folding would not destroy the valid
ty Of Other provisions Of the act.
Which could stand independent Of
aid provisions. 1t is the contention
i counsel for respondents that the
revision in question is directory
ik4 tlS dlih iIct Dliu!i+S UPON d ptl "
therwise entitled to the benefits Of
he act. but which can not comply
18th this basis Of apportOnment
authorities have been cited which
eem to. sustain the view. Morrow
Wipf, us \, w. 1l26.l As the
ulv authorized representatives Of
etitiOrer'S party. 50 Jar as appears
ON the petition. did not, within the
me prescribed by the provisions OF
ection <, seek to preserve the rights
/ their party by any other reason
bic method OF apportionment, we
an not see where petitioner is enti-
ed, particularly in this character o.
roceeding, TO question the validity
this particular provision Of the act
No Violation of Constitution :
It is contended by petitioner that {
,ction II OF the act renders the en- &;
re act void because. under contin-
encies which may arise under the
rovisions of that section, the act i
ould be impossible of enforcement
ur attention has not been directed
, any specific provision OF the con
5itution which this section violates.
the officers and party representa-
yes named in this section perform
fContinued an Fourth Pagel !