Commonwealth v. Griest

• Decision Date: 29 May 1900
• Docket Number: 8
• Citation: 196 Pa. 396,46 A. 505
• Parties: Commonwealth ex rel. v. Griest
• Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

46 A. 505

196 Pa. 396

Commonwealth ex rel. v. Griest

No. 8

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania

May 29, 1900

Argued May 14, 1900

Appeal, No. 8, May T., 1900, by plaintiff, from judgment of C.P. Dauphin Co., Commonwealth Docket, 1899, No. 31 dismissing petition for mandamus in case of commonwealth ex rel. the Attorney General v. W. W. Griest, secretary of the Commonwealth. Reversed.

Petition for mandamus.

The petition was as follows:

1. That on April 4, 1899, the house of representatives of the commonwealth aforesaid passed a resolution proposing an amendment to the constitution, the language of which is as follows:

"Section 1. Be it resolved by the senate and house of representatives of the commonwealth in general assembly met, that the following is proposed as amendments to the constitution of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania, in accordance with the provisions of article 18 thereof:

"AMENDMENT 1 TO ARTICLE 8, SECTION 1.

"Add at the end of the 1st paragraph of said section, after the words 'shall be entitled to vote at all elections,' the words, 'subject, however, to such laws requiring and regulating the registration of electors as the general assembly may enact,' so that the said section shall read as follows:

"Section 1. Qualification of Electors. -- Every male citizen twenty-one years of age, possessing the following qualifications, shall be entitled to vote at all elections subject, however, to such laws requiring and regulating the registration of electors as the general assembly may enact:

"1. He shall have been a citizen of the United States at least one month.

"2. He shall have resided in the state one year (or, if having previously been a qualified elector or native born citizen of the state he shall have removed therefrom and returned, then six months) immediately preceding the election.

"3. He shall have resided in the election district where he shall offer to vote at least two months immediately preceding the election.

"4. If twenty-one years of age and upwards, he shall have paid within two years a state or county tax, which shall have been assessed at least two months and paid at least one month before the election.

"AMENDMENT 2 TO ARTICLE 8, SECTION 7.

"Strike out from said section the words 'but no elector shall be deprived of the privilege of voting by reason of his name not being registered,' and add to said section the following words, 'but laws regulating and requiring the registration of electors may be enacted to apply to cities only; Provided, That such laws be uniform for cities of the same class,' so that the said section shall read as follows:

"Section 7. Uniformity of Election Laws. -- All laws regulating the holding of elections by the citizens or for the registration of electors shall be uniform throughout the state, but laws regulating and requiring the registration of electors may be enacted to apply to cities only; Provided, That such laws be uniform for cities of the same class."

2. That the said house of representatives also passed another resolution proposing an amendment to the constitution, the language of which is as follows:

"Section 1. Be it resolved by the senate and house of representatives the senate and house of representatives of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania in general assembly met, that the following is proposed as an amendment to the constitution of the commonwealth of Pennsylvania, in accordance with the provisions of article 18 thereof:

"AMENDMENT.

"Strike out section 4 of article 8 and insert in place thereof as follows:

"Section 4. All elections by the citizens shall be by ballot or by such other method as may be prescribed by law; Provided, That secrecy in voting be preserved."

3. That the said proposed amendments were introduced into the legislature in the shape of joint resolutions, were referred to the proper committees, reported therefrom with an affirmative recommendation, read at length on three separate days, considered and agreed to, passed each branch of the legislature with a majority of all the members elected thereto, were signed by the speaker of the house and the president of the senate, were entered upon the journals thereof with a list of the yea and nay votes cast for and against each amendment, after which they were certified to the governor like other bills and resolutions requiring his approval.

4. That the governor, in view of the fact that the question of his right to approve or disapprove legislation and resolutions proposing amendments to the constitution had not been decided by the courts of our state, and it having been the general practice of the legislature to submit such amendments to the chief executive, like other bills and resolutions, and the precedents in a number of cases seeming to establish the right of the governor to pass upon resolutions proposing amendments to the constitution, he concluded to exercise the veto power and did lodge in the office of the secretary of the commonwealth, with his objections thereto, the resolutions aforesaid within a period of thirty days after the adjournment of the legislature.

5. That the said W. W. Griest, secretary of the commonwealth, after having received said resolutions and veto messages, caused the same to be filed in his office, and treated said proposed amendments like other bills and resolutions which had been disapproved by the governor, and for this reason refused to have them published and printed in the pamphlet laws.

6. That George Burnham, Jr., a citizen, taxpayer, and qualified elector of said commonwealth, has presented a petition to the attorney general, setting forth all these facts, and also contending that article 18, which provides for the future amendment of the constitution, did not contemplate the necessity for the submission of joint resolutions proposing special amendments to the constitution for the approval or disapproval of the governor, and that, by reason of this fact, the governor exceeded his proper prerogative, and that notwithstanding his veto of said resolutions, the secretary of the commonwealth should still proceed to make publication of the proposed amendments as required in article 18 hereinbefore mentioned.

7. That the next general election after the adjournment of the last legislative session will be held on Tuesday, November 7, 1899, and that publication "to be published three months before the next general election" should begin on August 7, 1899.

8. That the said W. W. Griest, secretary of the commonwealth, having been requested to make publication of said proposed amendments by counsel for the said George Burnham, Jr., did, on July 13, 1899, notify him by letter that the governor having interposed the veto power, he did not feel warranted in making, and would not make, the publication of the same.

That your relator, in order to have the questions involved in the controversy judicially determined, and because there is no other adequate and specific remedy at law to inquire into said questions, prays this honorable court to grant a rule to show cause why a writ of mandamus should not be issued to, or make such other order as the law may require upon W. W. Griest, secretary of the commonwealth as aforesaid, commanding him to make arrangements and contracts for the publication of said proposed amendments in at least two newspapers in every county in which such newspaper shall be published, and to have such publication made as is required by article 18, providing for the future amendment of the constitution, and to give such other instructions in reference thereto, and in all other matters so perform his duties in connection therewith as the court may direct and the law require, so that said publication may be made not later than Monday, the 7th day of August next, or at such time as the law may require.

Defendant filed the following answer:

1. He admits that the resolution set forth in paragraph 1 of relator's petition was passed and adopted by the house of representatives of Pennsylvania and by the senate of Pennsylvania.

2. He admits that the resolution set forth in paragraph 2 of relator's petition was proposed in the house of representatives and adopted and passed by the house of representatives and the senate of Pennsylvania.

3. He admits that said amendments were considered, adopted, signed, entered and certified to the governor, as set forth in paragraph 3 of relator's petition.

4. He admits that the governor vetoed and disapproved said resolutions, as set forth in paragraph 4 of relator's petition.

5. He admits that he, the respondent, secretary of the commonwealth, declined and refused to publish and print said resolutions in the pamphlet laws, as set forth in paragraph 5 of relator's petition.

6. He admits the facts concerning the petition of George Burnham, Jr., as set forth in paragraph 6 of relator's petition, denying, however, that the governor exceeded his proper prerogative in disapproving said joint resolutions, and insisting, averring and maintaining that the governor properly exercised his prerogative in disapproving said resolutions, and that he, the respondent, was justified in not making publication of the proposed amendments in the newspapers of the commonwealth.

7. He admits that the next general election will be held on November 7, and, in order to be published three months before the next general election, the publication of these proposed amendments must begin on August 7, 1899, and he avers and declares that it is impracticable and impossible, should a mandamus issue, to make the necessary contracts and secure publication of the proposed amendments three months before the next general election in at least two newspapers in every county of the state in which such...