of canvassers for the county of Saginaw, sets forth, that "after a careful examination of all the returns of the township boards of inspectors of elections, for the towhships of Saginaw and Tuscola, being the only organized townships in said county, they, the said board of canvassers do declare and determine, that, whereas, Jeremiah Riggs, and Hiram L. Miller, having each received an equal number of votes, for the office of representative to the state legislature, are neither of them elected." It also appears by two several certificates of the clerk of the county of Saginaw, duly attested, that at the said election, Jeremiah Riggs received ninety-one votes in the township of Saginaw, and three votes in the township of Tuscola. That Hiram L. Miller received eighty-eight votes in the township of Saginaw, and six votes in the township of Tuscola. Two certain affidavits are presented to your committee, on the part of the said Miller, the object of which is to show that one Louis Tromble voted at the said election, in the township of Saginaw, for the said Riggs, for representative to the state legislature, and that the said Louis Tromble was not, at that time, twenty-one years of age. Affidavits are also presented on the part of said Riggs, to show that persons not naturalized, voted at the said election, for the said Miller. In regard to these affidavits, your committee are of opinion that evidence of that nature should be very cautiously received. The proper place for inquiry, and for sifting the polls, is at the ballot box; and it is very uncertain how far the true interests of the elective franchise will permit us to go beyond it. But this much is certain, that the reception of ex parte statements, made without the privilege of cross-examination or inquiry, as evidence of illegal votes, would place the rights of community at hazard, and introduce fraud, perjury and confusion, rather than truth and certainty, upon a subject most important to us all. Your committee are, therefore, of opinion that the said affidavits ought not to be regarded. But the question arises, (and in the opinion of your committee, it is the only question to be determined,) whether the township of Tuscola can be properly and legally admitted to participate in the election of representative for the county of Saginaw? The township of Tuscola, comprises the whole of the unorganized county of Tuscola, which, by an act approved April 1st, 1840, was attached to the county of Saginaw, for judicial purposes. In chapter eighth, title second, part first of the revised statutes, it is enacted that "unorganized counties, with other parts of the state, which may be attached to any organized county, for judicial purposes, shall, unless otherwise provided, be considered as part of such organized county, for all purpo ses concerning the election of officers which may be elected at the general or special election. But by the fourth section of the fourth article of the consti-. tution, it is provided that "each organized county shall be entitled to at least one representative." And by the apportionment act of April 3, 1838, one representative is accordingly allotted to the county of Saginaw; it being an organized county at the time of the forming the constitution. Upon this ground, it is claimed that the township of Tuscola, being no part of the original county of Saginaw, is not entitled to vote for representative in that county. If which principle is found correct, Jeremiah Riggs is elected by a majority of three votes; if not, there is a tie, as stated by the board of county canvassers. Your committee, after giving much thought, to the subject, have come to the conclusion that the township of Tuscola is a part of the county of Saginaw, according to the spirit of the constitution; and, therefore, entitled to vote at the election for representative. To suppose the contrary, would be to suppose that the bounds of no organized county could be altered, without disfranchising the part annexed to any other county; nor would it admit the inhabitants of the unorganized counties to the rights of citizenship, till they shall have attained a population sufficiently large to entitle them to a separate representation, according to the ratio of apportionment. It seems evident, then, for these and various other reasons, that the constitution, in saying "each organized county," regards it in respect to its countyship, in its civil, not in its geographical constitution. Your committee are, therefore, of opinion that in the county of Saginaw, there is no choice for the office of representative in the state legislature; therefore, Resolved, That whereas, Jeremiah Riggs and Hiram L. Miller, received each an equal number of votes, for the office of representative to the state legislature, at the election held on the second and third days of November, 1840, in the county of Saginaw, therefore, neither the said Riggs nor Miller, are elected; and there is, therefore, a vacancy in the said office of representative, in the county of Saginaw. E. LAKIN BROWN, Minority report. The minority of the committee on elections, to whom was referred certain papers relative to the clection in Saginaw county, beg leave to report: That they agree with the majority, that the only question [H. R.] Vol. II. 4 for the House to determine, is, whether the township of Tuscola, which was set off as a separate township, by "An act to organize certain townships," approved March 19, 1840, and at the same session of the legislature, attached to the county of Saginaw, for judicial purposes, by "An act to lay off and define the boundaries of certain counties," approved April 1, 1840, is, or is not, a part of the representative district of Sagi naw? If the township of Tuscola is a part of such district, then there is a tie, and a new election should be ordered. If, on the contrary, the township of Tuscola is not a part of the representative district of Saginaw, but, as the undersigned believe, a part and parcel of the representative district of the county of Lapeer, then the claimant, Jeremiah Riggs, is entitled to his seat on this floor, as the duly elected representative of Saginaw county. The third sub-division of the fourth article of the state constitution, says: "the legislature shall provide by law, for an enumeration of the inhabitants of this state, in the years 1837, and 1845, and every ten years after the said last mentioned time; and at their first session, after each enumeration so made as aforesaid, and also after each enumeration made by the authority of the United States, the legislature shall apportion anew, the representatives and senators among the several counties and districts, according to the number of white inhabitants." The constitution having made it the duty of the legislature, to provide by law for an enumeration of the inhabitants of the state, at certain prescribed periods, and having also made it the duty of the legislature, at their first session after each enumeration to be made under the state laws, and after each enumeration made by the authority of the United States, to apportion anew the representatives and senators, among the several counties and districts, according to the number of white inhabitants, the undersigned are of the opinion that after such apportionment is made, and the representative and senatorial districts are marked out by law, it is incompetent for the legislature, until a new apportionment is made as provided by the constitution, to alter or change, in any respect, such districts. A different construction of the constitution, it seems to the undersigned, would be subversive of all equality of representation. By the constitution, it is made the duty of the legislature, at its present session, to make a new apportionment of representatives and senators, upon the basis of the census taken by the federal government, during the last year, and to divide the state into representative and senatorial districts, consisting of one or more counties, for that purpose; but if the construction of the constitution for which we contend, be not correct, it will be competent for our successors, next winter, to undo all we shall have done, although much time and money may have been spent for that purpose. We are bound by the constitution, to district the state with reference to its population, as ascertained by an actual enumeration made by law; but there is nothing in the constitution requiring the legislature, in making an apportionment at any other times than those specified in the constitution, (supposing it to be competent for them to do so,) to be governed by the population. Such a construction would open a door for the practice of great injustice and iniquity, in a country like ours, where party excitement sometimes runs high. The dominant party, when sinking in the estimation of the people, would ever be ready to resort to a new apportionment, or a change of districts, to retrieve their loss, and perpetuate their power. If the views we have taken of the constitution, then be correct, the only remaining question is, to what representative district, if any, did the section of country embraced in the township of Tuscola, belong, under the apportionment made by the legislature in 1838? By the act entitled "An act for the apportionment of the members of the house of representatives of this state, and for the arrangement of the senate dis tricts," approved April 3, 1838, the county of Lapeer is entitled to one representative, and the county of Saginaw to one representative. By "An act to attach a part of the county of Sanilac, for judicial purposes, to the county of Lapeer," approved March 28, 1836, the section of country now embraced within the township of Tuscola, with that part of the state lying north of the township of Tuscola, was attached to the county of Lapeer, for judicial purposes, and made a part of the township of Lapeer, in the county of Lapeer, and as the undersigned believe, continued to be a part of that county, for judicial and other purposes, from that time down to the 19th of March, 1840, when it was set off as a separate township, and attached to the county of Saginaw, for judicial purposes, as already stated. It was then, a part of the Lapeer representative district, under the apportionment of 1838, and must necessarily remain a part of that representative district, until a new apportionment is made, as prescribed by the constitution. Section first, chapter eighth, title second, part first of the revised statutes, mentioned in the report of the majority, is in these words: "unorganized counties, with other parts of the state, which may be attached to any organized county for judicial purposes, shall, unless otherwise provided, be considered as a part of such organized county, for all purposes concerning the election of officers which may be elected at the general or special election." This section does not, in the opinion of the undersigned, alter the case, First. Because, if construed in the way the majority construe it, and our views of the constitution be correct, it is unconstitutional; and Second. Because the section of country embraced within the township of Tuscola, was, in the language of the section itself, otherwise provided for, so far as it regarded representation, when attached to Saginaw for judicial purposes, it then being a part of the Lapeer representative district, under the apportionment of 1838. By attaching the township of Tuscola to the Saginaw district, it alters two representative districts-the districts of Saginaw and Lapeer; and two senatorial districts, the third and fourth, Saginaw being in the fourth, and Lapeer being in the third senatorial districts. We mention this fact to show the effect it would have on the apportionment of 1838. The undersigned are, therefore, of opinion that the claimant, Jeremiah Riggs, should be admitted to take his seat, as the representative of Saginaw county. GEO. REDFIELD, [No. 17.] Report from the majority of the committee on ways and means, to whom was referred a bill entitled "A bill to establish the pay of members and officers of the legislature, and for other purposes." The committee on ways and means, to whom was referred a bill entitled "A bill to establish the pay of members and officers of the legislature, and for other purposes," have had the same under consideration, and report: That said bill ought not to pass; and among the many reasons which might be assigned therefor, your committee deem it only necessary to quote that part of the message of the Executive, which has also been referted to your committee, and which is adopted as the report of your committee, in the words following: Would you further decrease the compensation of those who are employed in the public service? this would perhaps be a fearful experiment. If you lessen compensation much below the point which talent and intellectual endowment, and unquestioned integrity would command in the private vocations |