Arizona republican., 1921-06-29
WEDNESDAY MORNING. JUNE as. 1921
No human poaUer can force the entrenchments of the human mind; computslon neUer persuddes,; tt only makes hypocrites.
 -Fenel0n
Rssistration and House Bill ss


 thence to prevent in It's older of going fore an official opinion the necessity regis ration for the election referred House S3; that is an opinion to whether election without registration would be valid.
 The question of course has nothing to do with the other whether which in it's nature is referred bill may be subjected to a referendum. though perhaps without the institution of court test that point ministerial officer may guided somewhat by his belief the necessity of regis tration.
 Unaccustomed the handling of the tools of the lawyer have found directly point some in which decisions tend strength belief that in the peculiar circums rounding house bill ss. registration is
 There is though which the opponents of the bill to rely. Fish ct al Kugal ct a 1s5 Pacific Reporter The plaintiffs in con testees in a town election in Colorado. The constitution of that state makes registration a necessary qualification and the statute ticularly makes registration condition precedent elections the date of which is fixed by law The plaintiffs in and contestees the already in office by previous election. They op posed the the ground that the election had been held without registration and therefore void The case waas decided against them and appeal taken resulting in reversal
 The supreme court found
 The record concusively shows that there no
  case was whether registration essential a valid election As the right of the defendants in error to these offices rested solely election which invalid. the court could not lawfully dd- judge them entitled thereto and plaintiffs in error entitled hold virtue of previous elec ton they should not have been disturbed in their possession the offices until their successors elected and qualified.
 The question whether voters could not vote der a previous registration considered but it held that they could because the law expressly provided that registration town elections must be held. It was not held in this
 There are numerous decisions having some bear ing on subject the majority to hold that an election is not invalidated when circumstances make the holding of registration impossible. Ref erence is made both in Corpus Juris 20 and Ameri- can and English Encyclopedia to the Of State vs. Piper. Nebraska II where election sus- tained though there no registration because of the impossiblity of holding within the time that would elapse before the date of the election.
 The following is from Corpus Juris:
 Whether general law in regard the registra of voters does does not apply to certain cleo tons. municipal elections, parish elections, school electionos. county seat elections, option elections and elections upon the ques- tion bonds shall be issued, stock sub scrbed and the submission to the people whether constitutional convention shall be called depends entirely upon whether there is anything in express by implication in the constitution statute making the registration for such elections necessary: in other words matter of constitu tional statutory construction. Where the law that there shall be special registration for special election special election for which there is no specaal registration is invalid
 The general rule is that law requiring the regis tration of voters condition precedent to hold election is mandatory, and any attempted election without regard such registration law is nullity. But exceptions the rule have been recognized der particular circumstances and particular statutes, and 1t must be remembered that there is vast diff irregular registration and total absence of registration. The failure legislature Sionf rpgi as ion precedent the right directed by the state not operate to deprive those having the qualifications of the constitution from voting at subsequent election, and where statute requiring registration is mpledy abolished by constitutional amendment registration is necessary.
 We have ofund no decisions controverting the foregoing view
 Our situation somewhat different from that of any of the cases we the difference is such that the suggestion the stronger a pension of registration for the special election House Bill There is provision in Arizona for the holding o a special registration for special election There is though constitutional provision authorizing the legislature do what it did when il ~a1ed a special election House Bill S3 The legislature could have named any date it chose fol etat election It could have named date neal that inc machinery for the registration provided b, our statute could not possibly have been put int ,neration' and then under the decision in the Pipe case the election would have been invalid notwith standing there had been no registration Anyhow . aouay impossible under our statute to hold regis ,ration Yet the legislature is empowered by the con ,itution to call slection in spite of this impossi hh;ty If our statute is imperfect and this mpossi htv is a result constitutional permission to cal fbe election must prevail Attention seems to b called to this possible situation by the writers or bot e.ornus Juris and the Encyciopedia when they de ,.re that registration laws must be reasonable, inc suspension of them Is to result In the invaiidao of slsctions