People v. Stevenson

• Decision Date: 07 December 1917
• Docket Number: No. 11469.,11469.
• Citation: 117 N.E. 747,281 Ill. 17
• Parties: PEOPLE v. STEVENSON, Secretary of State, et al.
• Court: Illinois Supreme Court

281 Ill. 17

117 N.E. 747

PEOPLE

v.STEVENSON, Secretary of State, et al.

No. 11469.

Supreme Court of Illinois.

Oct. 23, 1917.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 7, 1917.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Sangamon County; Norman L. Jones, Judge.

Certiorari by the State's Attorney of Sangamon county on behalf of the people against Lewis G. Stevenson, Secretary of State, and others, comprising the State Canvassing Board, to review its action in canvassing certain election returns. The court quashed, annulled, and set aside the proceedings set forth in defendants' return, and defendants appeal. Judgment affirmed.

Carter, C. J., and Cartwright, J., dissenting.

Edward J. Brundage, Atty. Gen., Wilson, Moore & McIlvaine, of Chicago, and Brown, Hay & Creighton, of Springfield (N. G. Moore, of Chicago, and George C. Gale, of Galesburg, of counsel), for appellants.

C. R. Mortimer, State's Atty., W. St. J. Wines, of Springfield, Fifer & Bohrer and Barry & Morrissey, all of Bloomington, for the People.

FARMER, J.

The Legislature of Illinois at its 1915 session adopted a resolution submitting to the people of the state the question of the adoption of a proposed amendment to the Constitution, to be known as section 14 of article 9. The proposed amendment was as follows:

‘From and after the date when this section shall be in force the powers of the General Assembly over the subject-matter of the taxation of personal property shall be as complete and unrestricted as they would be if sections one (1), three (3), nine (9), and ten (10), of this article of the Constitution did not exist: Provided, however, that any tax levied upon personal property must be uniform as to persons and property of the same class within the jurisdiction of the body imposing the same, and all exemptions from taxation shall be by general law, and shall be revocable by the General Assembly at any time.’ See Laws 1915, p. 731.

No question is raised as to the procedure in submitting the proposed amendment to the people to be voted upon. This was done at the general election of November 7, 1916, at which time a Governor, Lieutenant-Governor, Secretary of State, Auditor, Treasurer, Attorney General, Superintendent of Public Instruction, presidential electors, members of Congress, and members of the General Assembly were voted upon. The ballots were cast, canvassed, and returns made according to law. Subsequently, within the time prescribed, the then Secretary of State, Auditor of Public Accounts, and State Treasurer, in the presence of the Governor, in their capacity as the state canvassing board, canvassed the returns, including the votes for and against the proposed amendment. The board of canvassers on December 9, 1916, in the presence of the Governor, made a written declaration of the result of the vote as to the adoption of said proposed amendment, which was signed by the said three state officers and certified to by the Governor. Said certificate, so far as here involved, is as follows:

‘We, the undersigned state officers of the state of Illinois, do hereby certify that we have on the 24th day of November, A. D. 1916, and between that date and this 9th day of December, A. D. 1916, in the presence of the Governor, carefully canvassed the votes given at the above-named election for and against the adoption of the proposed amendment to the Constitution of the state of Illinois recited above, and find that the highest legislative vote cast at said election was 1,269,331; that the total number cast for the adoption of said amendment was 656,298; that the total number of votes cast against said amendment was 295,782; that a majority of all the votes cast at said election for members of the General Assembly was cast in favor of the adoption of said amendment to the Constitution; and we hereby declare, in conformity to the law, that the amendment aforesaid is adopted and henceforth becomes a part of the Constitution of the state of Illinois.’

Due proclamation was made by the Governor that the amendment had been adopted and had become a part of the Constitution, which was published as requird by law. The total vote cast for the adoption of the proposed amendment exceeded one-half of the highest vote for members of the General Assembly. It did not equal one-half of the number on the poll list, nor the vote for presidential electors, nor that for Governor, but exceeded one-half the vote cast for any other state officer and for members of the General Assembly.

At the January term of the circuit court of Sangamon county the state's attorney of that county, on behalf of the people of the state of Illinois, filed a petition for certiorari, making the officers comprising the state canvassing board parties defendant. The writ was ordered issued and a return to the same made by defendants January 6, 1917, to which was attached a sheet on which the vote was shown and the result compiled, and containing the certificate of the canvassing board which we have before set out. The terms of office of said parties defendant having expired, their successors were substituted as defendants. The return to the writ showed 1,343,381 male electors voted at said election; that 656,298 voted for the proposed amendment and 295,782 against it. The highest vote for members of the General Assembly (hereafter designated highest legislative vote) was 1,269,331. This highest legislative vote was arrived at by taking the aggregate vote in each county for members of the House of Representatives and dividing it by three. The aggregate vote for state senator in each county where candidates for state senator were voted for was ascertained, and if the vote for senator exceeded one-third the number of votes for members of the House of Representatives in such county the vote for senator was taken; if it did not exceed one-third the number of votes for members of the House of Representatives the latter was taken as the highest legislative vote for that county. An aggregate of the highest legislative vote in all the counties thus obtained was found to be, as above stated, 1,269,331. It appearing that the total number of votes cast for the adoption of the amendment was a majority of the legislative vote thus arrived at, said amendment was declared adopted. The trial court reviewed the action of the canvassing board and its finding that the proposed amendment was adopted, found for petitioner, and quashed the record and return of such board. The judgment of the circuit court entered April 16, 1917, recites defendants to the writ had jurisdiction to canvass the vote and determine and announce the result, but ‘that the method pursued by said board of canvassers for determining whether said amendment to the Constitution had been duly adopted was not in pursuance of their jurisdiction and that their conclusion thereon was not reached in the due and proper exercise of their jurisdiction.’ The court quashed, annulled, and set aside the proceedings set forth in defendants' return to the writ of certiorari as being without authority of law. From that judgment this appeal is taken.

The question to be determined is whether, under article 14 of the Constitution of 1870, the test or criterion for the adoption of a constitutional amendment is a majority of the total number of electors voting at the election or a majority of the electors voting for members of the General Assembly.

The Constitution of 1818 (article 7) contained no provision for submitting to the people the question of the adoption of an amendment. Under that Constitution, when two-thirds of the General Assembly thought it necessary to alter or amend that instrument they could recommend ‘to the electors, at the next election of members to the General Assembly, to vote for or against a convention,’ and if ‘a majority of all the citizens of the state, voting for representatives,’ voted for a convention, the General Assembly was required, at its next session, to call a convention. Section 1 of article 12 of the Constitution of 1848 provided that when two-thirds of all the members elected to each branch of the General Assembly thought it necessary to amend or alter that instrument, they should recommend to the electors, ‘at the next election of members of the General Assembly,’ to vote on the question, and if ‘a majority of all the electors of the state voting for representatives' voted for a convention one should be called. Section 2 authorized the submission by the General Assembly of amendments to the Constitution. When the General Assembly, by a two-thirds vote of the members elected in each house, proposed an amendment, it was referred to the next regular session of that body, and if it received the vote of a majority of all the members elect in each branch it was required to be submitted to the people ‘at the next general election,’ and if a majority ‘of all the electors voting at such election for members of the House of Representatives' voted for the amendment it became a part of the Constitution.

It will be seen that the proposition for calling a convention under the Constitutions of 1818 and 1848 was required to be submitted to the electors at the next election of members of the General Assembly, and if a majority ‘voting for representatives' voted for the convention one should be called. As to amendments to the Constitution of 1848, after they had received the approval of two General Assemblies they were required to be submitted for adoption or rejection at the next general election in such manner as might be prescribed by law, ‘and if a majority of all the electors voting at such election for members of the House of Representatives' voted for an amendment it became a part of the Constitution. In language too plain to admit of dispute, both Constitutions made the vote for members of the House of Representatives the test for determining whether a constitutional convention should be called or whether an amendment had been adopted at an election...