Attorney General ex rel. Beers v. Board of Canvassers

118 N.W. 584, 155 Mich. 44
CourtMichigan Supreme Court
DecidedDecember 3, 1908
DocketCalendar No. 23,171½
StatusPublished
Cited by11 cases

This text of 118 N.W. 584 (Attorney General ex rel. Beers v. Board of Canvassers) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Michigan Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Attorney General ex rel. Beers v. Board of Canvassers, 118 N.W. 584, 155 Mich. 44 (Mich. 1908).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

At the recent general election Charles E. White, John S. Beers, John W. Taylor, and Lloyd East were candidates for election to the office of State senator for the seventh senatorial district, comprising the counties of Cass and Berrien. Of the votes cast at the election for the office of State senator, Mr. White received 10,506; Mr. Beers, 6,971; Mr. Taylor, 384; and Mr. East, 377. The said board of canvassers having convened to canvass the vote for said office, in accordance with the provisions of the statute (1 Comp. Laws, § 3684 et seq.), the relator, John S. Beers, presented to and filed with the board his petition, setting forth, among other things, that at the time of the general election and for upwards of three years and ten months prior thereto, and at the time of filing the petition, the said White had been and was prosecuting attorney of the said county of Berrien, and was therefore, under section 6 of article 4 of the State Constitution, ineligible to the office of State senator, and all votes cast for him were void; that in the early part of August, 1908, an opinion of the attorney general to the effect that said White was ineligible was published in various newspapers in the district, and such ineligibility was understood by all intelligent voters; that said Beers had received a majority of the valid votes cast for said office at said election.

“Your petitioner therefore prays that your honorable body reject all votes cast for the said Charles E. White for said office of State senator, the same being void under the Constitution, and that your honorable body determine that your petitioner was elected to said office of State senator,” etc.

The board ignored and denied the prayer of said petition and certified to the election of said White.

The petition filed in this court prays for the writ of mandamus, commanding said board:

[46]*46“(a) To reconvene at the office of the clerk of the county of Berrien and recanvass the votes cast for State senator in said district, and in the recanvass of said votes to treat all votes cast for the said Charles E. White as void.
“ (6) That said board of district canvassers of the said Seventh senatorial district of the state of Michigan be directed to issue a certificate of election in accordance with section 3689 of the Compiled Laws to such person as this honorable court may determine as being lawfully entitled thereto.
“ (c) That such other and further order may be made in the premises as to this honorable court may seem meet.’*

We are of the opinion that the board of canvassers properly refused to consider the relator’s petition, for the reason that the question thereby presented for their consideration was not within the jurisdiction of the board to determine. Bradley v. Board of State Canvassers, 154 Mich. 274. We are also of the opinion that this court' has no jurisdiction in the premises. Section 9 of article 4 of the State Constitution has made the State senate the sole judge of the “qualifications, elections and returns of its members.” This court can neither determine a basis for its decision nor review it when made. Wheeler v. Board of Canvassers of Manistee Co., 94 Mich. 448; Vance v. Board of Canvassers of St. Clair Co., 95 Mich. 462.

The application is denied.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Connor Berdy v. Sonja Buffa
928 N.W.2d 204 (Michigan Supreme Court, 2019)
Gamrat v. Allard
320 F. Supp. 3d 927 (W.D. Michigan, 2018)
Sevilla v. Elizalde
112 F.2d 29 (D.C. Circuit, 1940)
State Ex Rel. McGrath v. Erickson
281 N.W. 366 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1938)
Lessard v. Snell
63 P.2d 893 (Oregon Supreme Court, 1937)
Reif v. Barrett
188 N.E. 889 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1933)
Rainey v. Taylor
143 S.E. 383 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1928)
State ex rel. Barber v. Circuit Court for Marathon County
190 N.W. 563 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1922)
State ex rel. Kustermann v. Board of State Canvassers
130 N.W. 489 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1911)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
118 N.W. 584, 155 Mich. 44, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/attorney-general-ex-rel-beers-v-board-of-canvassers-mich-1908.