95 Mich. 155 | Mich. | 1893
Relator was a candidate for Representative in Congress at the election held in November last. Upon the returns made to the State Board of Canvassers as then constituted the certificate of election was delivered to his opponent. On January 1, 1893, the State officers constituting said State Board of Canvassers retired from office, and the newly-elected State officers entered upon the duties of their respective offices. Upon application made by relator to this Court, a mandamus issued to the board of county canvassers of Ionia county, requiring that board to reconvene, and recailvass the returns of the votes of that county for Congressman, and report the result to the Secretary of State. Belknap v. Board of Canvassers, 94 Mich. 516. That recanvass has been had, and the result thereof has been reported to the present Secretary of State. From the return .so made it appears that the committee of the board of canvassers of the county of Ionia appointed to tabulate the returns reported such tabulation, from which it appeared that the total number of votes cast for relator was 4,281, and the total number cast for relator’s opponent was 4,004; but said committee also reported that included in said tabulated statement was the vote of each of the two voting precincts in the township of Lyons, in said county; that the vote of said township had not been consolidated according to law; and that the return from district
"We think the case must be treated as though the returns had not been received until the present State officers had entered upon their duties. Certain State officers ex officio constitute the board of canvassers. The old board neglected no duty. They canvassed the returns which were before them, and certain of the returns so canvassed were held to be invalid. It is the duty of the present State officers constituting the Board of Canvassers to canvass the returns as- now presented.
Upon the second question presented, the certificate of the chairman and clerk of the board of county canvassers is in due form. This, if unimpeached, would be sufficient for the board to act upon; but the return shows that a resolution was adopted to exclude the vote pf the second precinct of Lyons township on the ground that it was not certified as required by section 130, How. Stat., the board assuming that that section controlled. It is at least doubtful whether the force of this resolution is not i overcome by the subsequent vote adopting the tabulated statement made by the committee, which included the vote of both
“ After the count of the tickets or ballots has been completed, the result shall be immediately publicly declared, and the number of votes received by each candidate or person on the ticket shall be publicly declared by one of the inspectors. The inspectors shall then prepare a statement of the result in duplicate, showing the whole number of votes for each office, the names of the persons for which such votes were given, and the number each person received. Such statement, when certified by the inspectors, and duly signed, shall be delivered, one copy to the township clerk, to be filed by him in his office, and the other to the inspector appointed by the board to attend the county canvass.”
The act makes no provision for the consolidation of the returns from two or more precincts in a township. There is no object in such consolidation, except in cases where an election is held for township officers, and there is no provision for a canvassing board as distinct from the board of election inspectors.
The board will therefore be directed to include in their
A mandamus will issue accordingly, but without costs.