Eddy v. Kincaid
| Decision Date | 12 September 1895 |
| Citation | 41 P. 655,28 Or. 537 |
| Parties | EDDY v. KINCAID, Secretary of State. |
| Court | Oregon Supreme Court |
On motion for rehearing. Denied.
For former report, see 41 P. 156.
In his petition for a rehearing, counsel for the defendant calls attention to the fact that he did not base his contention as to the effect of the act of 1891 entirely upon the first section, but contended at the hearing that sections 9 and 72 as well as section 1, and, in fact, the whole act, indicated an intention to cover the entire subject of elections, and in effect, to provide for the election of all state officers by the people, and is therefore inconsistent with, and repeals by implication, that portion of the act creating a board of railroad commissioners which provides for the election of its members by the legislature. Repeals by implication are not favored, and it is only when the provisions of the latter act are so repugnant to the former that both cannot stand, or when the latter is clearly intended as a substitute for the former, that such an interpretation is to prevail. End. Interp. St. § 210. Now, it cannot be claimed that the act of 1891 was intended as a substitute for the act creating the railroad commission; nor, in our opinion, is there any conflict between the two acts. The office of railroad commissioner is nowhere mentioned in the act of 1891, nor does it provide that such officers shall be elected by the people. It begins by declaring that a general election shall be held on the first Monday in June, 1892, and biennially thereafter, at which time there shall be chosen so many of the following officers "as are to be elected in such year [naming certain officers; the railroad commissioners however, not being among the number], and all other state district, county and precinct officers provided by law." It is thus, by its terms, confined to such officers as are by law to be elected by the people; and, as there is no law providing that the railroad commissioners shall be so elected, it manifestly has no application to them. The act of 1891 was intended, as its title plainly implies, to fix the time for and regulate the manner of conducting state district, county, and precinct elections; to prescribe the manner of making nominations; the printing and delivery of ballots; and to prevent frauds and punish crimes affecting the right of suffrage. And the section declaring what officers shall be...
To continue reading
Request your trial