At the general election held in November, 1864, the inhabitants of the township of Pontiac, held the polls of election for such township, in the. city of Pontiac, and it is insisted that they had this right by provisions of law. The only provision of law applicable to this case which we find, or to which we have been referred, is that contained in the charter of the city of Pontiac, (Sess. Laws of 1861, p. 365, §95,) which is as follows: “Nothing in this act shall operate to prevent the holding of the annual meetings of the township of Pontiac, nor to prevent the township clerk and other officers of said township from keeping their offices in said city, as though this act had not passed.” Unskillfully as this section is drawn, the obvious intent of the Legislature in this case, unlike other and broader provisions in some other similar cases, (see Laws of 1859, pp. 191, 875,) was to retain to the inhabitants of the township the right to hold their annual township meetings, and for the township officers to keep their offices within the city, and it can be extended no further. Whether this provision conflicts with the constitution or not, we are not called upon to determine under the question now presented. Conceding that the township
We think, therefore, that the vote of the township of Pontiac was illegally cast, and that the defendant, Knight, is lawfully in possession of the office of Judge of Probate of his county.
Judgment for defendant.