State v. Bush

• Citation: 45 Kan. 138,25 P. 614
• Parties: THE STATE OF KANSAS v. W. O. BUSH
• Decision Date: 01 January 1891
• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Kansas

25 P. 614

45 Kan. 138

THE STATE OF KANSAS v. W. O. BUSH

Supreme Court of Kansas

January 1, 1891

Error from Butler District Court.

THE case is stated in the opinion, filed on January 10, 1891.

Judement reversed and cause remanded.

L. B Kellogg, attorney general, and E. H. Hutchins, county attorney, for appellant.

VALENTINE J. All the Justices concurring.

OPINION

VALENTINE, J.:

This was a criminal prosecution, in the district court of Butler county, under §§ 15, chapter 80, of the Laws of 1879 (Gen. Stat. of 1889, P 711); in which prosecution the defendant, W. O. Bush, who was the city clerk of the city of El Dorado, a city of the second class, was charged upon information in two counts with registering J. N. Hanna as a voter--Hanna not being present, nor appearing in person, nor giving his name, age, occupation, or place of residence. The title to the act in which the aforesaid §§ 15 is found, and §§ 8 and 15 of such act, read as follows:

"AN ACT to provide for and to regulate the registration of voters in cities of the first find second class, and to repeal all prior acts in relation thereto."

"SEC. 8. No person shall be registered unless he appear in person before the city clerk, at the city clerk's office, during usual office hours, and apply to be registered, and give his name, age, occupation, and particular place of residence, as required to make the proper entries in the poll-books."

" SEC. 15. If any officer shall neglect or refuse to perform any duty required by this act, or in the manner required by this act, or shall neglect or refuse to enter upon the performance of any such duty, or shall enter, or cause or permit to be entered on the registry books, the name of any person in any other manner or at any other time than as prescribed by this act, or shall enter, or cause or permit to be entered on such list, the name of any person not entitled to be registered thereon according to the provisions of this act, or shall destroy, secrete, mutilate, alter, or change any such registry books, he shall, upon conviction, be punished by confinement and hard labor in the penitentiary not exceeding one year, and shall forfeit any office he may then hold."

The portions of the foregoing sections particularly applicable to this case are those which read as follows:

"No person shall be registered unless he appear in person before the city clerk, at the city clerk's office, during usual office hours, and apply to be registered, and give his name, age, occupation, and particular place of residence. . . . If any officer [a city clerk] . . . shall enter, or cause or permit to be entered on the registry books, the name of any person in any other manner or at any other time than as prescribed by this act, . . . he shall, upon conviction, be punished," etc.

The defendant moved the court to quash the information upon the following grounds, to wit:

"First, that the act of the legislature of the state of Kansas, under which said information is pretended to be drawn, to wit, chapter 80 of the Laws of 1879, is unconstitutional, being in contravention of §§ 16 of article 2 of the constitution of the state of Kansas; second, that no offense is charged against the defendant in said information; and third, that neither of the counts of said information states and charges an offense against the laws of the state of Kansas."

The court sustained the motion and discharged the defendant, and the state of Kansas appeals to this court. No brief for the defendant has been filed in this court, but from the plaintiff's brief and the defendant's motion to quash, we can probably obtain a correct understanding as to what were the grounds upon which the court below quashed the information.

It is claimed, as we understand, that the title to the act is not broad enough to authorize a provision in the body of the act creating a criminal offense or prescribing a punishment therefor. We think it is. (The State v. Barrett, 27 Kan. 213, and cases there cited; Durein v. Pontious, 34 id. 353.) The offense in the present case and the punishment therefor have relation to the general subject contained in the title to the act, ...