Soldiers' home, inmates of -May vote, when. HON. P. A. GIBSON, Erie, Pa.: ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, } MY DEAR SIR-Your favor of 17, inst., at hand. In reply I take pleasure in quoting you section 5, chapter VII of our State constitution, as amended by joint resolution in 1893, and ratified at the November election in 1894, as follows: "No elector shall be deemed to have gained or lost a residence by reason of his being employed in the service of the United States or of this state; nor while engaged in the navigation of the waters of this state or of the United States, or of the high seas; nor while a student of any seminary of learning; nor while kept at any almshouse or other asylum at public expense; nor while confined in any public prison, except that honorably discharged soldiers, sailors and marines who have served in the military or naval forces of the United States or of this state, and who reside in soldiers' homes established by the state, may acquire a residence where such home is located." Under the amendments inmates of a soldiers' home are permitted to vote in the township in which such home is located. Yours respectfully, FRED A. MAYNARD, Attorney General. Two offices-When incompatible-Register of deeds and supervisor. H. E. WINSOR, Esq., Marshall, Mich.: ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, } DEAR SIR-Your letter of recent date, received and considered, in which you ask for my opinion as to whether or not it will be necessary for your candidate elect to the office of register of deeds to resign the office of supervisor of one of the wards of Albion City, which he now holds. I am unable to find any statutory provisions in this state that directly makes the holding of these two offices unlawful, and the only other question involved is, are these two offices incompatible, under the common law? That a person cannot hold two offices that are incompatible is not subject to question, and the acceptance of a second office that is incompatible with the first vacates the first office as a matter of law. An examination of the statutes relative to the powers and duties of the board of supervisors discloses many instances wherein the said board may exercise a supervisory control over the office of register of deeds, and his power is such, in my judgment, as to make the holding of the two offices inconsistent and incompatible. The resignation of the office of supervisor would certainly obviate any possible complication or question. Yours respectfully, Board of county canvassers-Duty under act 125, Laws of 1897, to publish in two newspapers the entire vote. ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, HON. E. L. KINGSLAND, St. Joseph, Mich. : 1} MY DEAR SIR-I have given careful examination to the question presented in your letter of December 12. The question of law is this: By Section 4 of Act 125 of the Public Acts of 1897, is it the duty of the board of county canvassers to cause a correct statement to be published in at least two newspapers printed and circulated in their county, for all the candidates voted for, and votes cast on the question of a general revision of the constitution, or should the published statement be confined to county officers and members of the legislature? I can readily see how the opinion could be held that the publication should be confined to the officers named in the latter part of the section, but I think after having carefully considered that phase of the case, that it was the intent of the Legislature, that a full statement should be printed in the two newspapers, setting forth the entire vote cast at the election. The section, in my opinion, should read as if the words commencing, "It shall also be the duty of said board," and ending with the word "districts," were in parentheses. These words were intended to cover a particular case, and special circumstances, and do not refer to the general duties of the board as set forth in the entire section. I am confirmed in my opinion that it was the intention of the legislature to cause the entire vote to be published, from the fact that, as I am informed, it is the universal custom throughout the State so to do. Yours respectfully, FRED A. MAYNARD, Attorney General. Bonds of county officers-War revenue stamps required on. ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, FRED. A. BEEDE, ESQ., Prosecuting Attorney, Harrisville, Mich. : } DEAR SIR-I am in receipt of your favor of January 4, in which you ask whether it is necessary that county officers' official bonds shall bear the revenue stamp provided for in the War-Revenue law. I will state that I have given the matter some examination. The act in question is as follows: "For indemnifying any person or persons, firm or corporation who shall have become bound or engaged as surety for the payment of any sum of money, or for the due execution or performance of the duties of any office or position, and to account for money received by virtue threof, and all other bonds of any description, except such as may be required in legal proceedings, not otherwise provided for in this schedule, fifty cents." I find by reference to the treasury decisions upon the act, that it was held by the opinion of the commissioner of internal revenue, on July 13, 1898, that the bonds of municipal officers require to be stamped. It has also been held that the official bonds given by internal revenue officers are required to be stamped. I am inclined to think that the parties offering the official bonds for approval, would subject themselves to the danger of prosecution by the United States authorities if they did not attach stamps to their bonds, as required by the WarRevenue law. Whether these bonds would be admissible in evidence if the stamp is not affixed, is a question of some doubt. Our Supreme Court has held, under the revenue act in force during the civil war, that Congress did not have the right to control the rules of evidence in the state courts, and permitted recovery upon notes and other evidences of debt, which had not been stamped as required by law. I think the board of supervisors should take the safe side, and require the stamping of these bonds. Yours respectfully, HORACE M. OREN, 'County school commissioner holding office while attending college in another county. MR. J. H. BRILEY, Hillman, Mich.: ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, } The DEAR SIR--Your letter of January 9, received and considered. questions you submit for my consideration are as follows: First, Can a person who has been elected county school commissioner lawfully hold the office while attending college outside of the county in which he was elected, if he is present at the examinations, and performs the other necessary work of the office? Second, Could he appoint a deputy to perform the work for him? Replying to your first question, would say that in attending college outside of the county a county school commissioner would not vacate his office in the absence of any intention to change his legal residence. The only question that could be raised, would be in the event of his failure to perform the duties required of him under the law. Replying to your second question, would say, that sub-division six of Section 133 of the general school laws provides for the appointment by the county commissioner of an "assistant visitor," providing he is unable to visit all the schools of the county as required by law, but no provision is made for the appointment of a deputy county school commissioner in the laws of this State, and in the absence of express authority so to do, it could not be legally done. Yours respectfully, HORACE M. OREN. Senate-No member of, eligible to appointment upon both the Fisheries Committee and the Committee on Finance and Appropriations. ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, HON. ORRIN W. ROBINSON, Lieutenant Governor, Capitol: DEAR SIR-You have requested my opinion as to whether or not, under rule 17 of the Senate, you would be authorized to appoint a member of the Senate upon the two committees, fisheries and finance and appropriations. The rule provides that no member of the committees on State institutions or departmens shall be a member of the committee on finance and appropriations. The purpose of this rule is two-fold. First, To give the committee on finance and appropriations revisionary power over the action of the committees on State institutions and departments; and Second, To prevent preferences that would be likely to creep into the action of the finance and appropriation committee, due to the special interests which members of the committees on State institutions or departments might have for the particular institution or department which their committee related to. It is undoubtedly true, that the fisheries committee would have referred to it in the first instance, all matters of appropriations for the State Board of Fish Commissioners, and if a member of the fisheries committee was also upon the committee on finance and appropriations, he would have the opportunity, by reason of his influence, to give preference to these fisheries appropriations, and it strikes me that it would be a violation of the spirit, if not the letter, of the rule, to make the appointment suggested by you. Yours respectfully, HORACE M. OREN, Board of election commissioners, duty of to furnish lead pencils. ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, MR. WARD F. DOUBLEDAY, Kalamazoo, Mich. : DEAR SIR-Your letter of 13, inst., relative to the board of election commissioners furnishing pencils along with the official ballots for the election this coming spring, received and considered. Section 17, Act No. 59 of the Laws of 1897, expressly makes it the duty of the board of election commissioners to provide and enclose in each package of official ballots, the necessary pencils required by said section, and there can be no question in regard to the duty of said board so to do. Yours respectfully, HORACE M. OREN, Incompatibility of two or more offices, when-Commissioner of schools and school director. ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE, January 17, 1899. MR. D. E. HUBBELL, Marlette, Mich. : DEAR SIR-Your letter of 14, inst., received and considered, whereby you submit for my consideration the following questions: "Can a man hold the office of commissioner of schools of the county and at the same time be director of one of the school districts of the same county?" Replying to this question, I desire to say that there is no statute in this State preventing the holding of two offices of this character by the same person, and the only question to be considered is, whether or not they are incompatible. The general rule of law is, that two offices are incompatible where the duty of one conflicts with the other, or, where a person occupying one of the offices would be so placed that he could not properly perform the duties of the other; or, where the holder of one office may exercise a supervisory control over the other. These two offices are separate and distinct from each other, and the school laws expressly define the duties of each. The county commissioner of schools is a member of the board of county examiners, and among other duties, he is required to visit each school in the county at least once in each year, and to examine carefully the discipline, the mode of instruction and the progress and proficiency of pupils. Section 50 of the general school laws provides that the director of the school district in each year previous to the second Monday in September, shall make and file a report to the board of school inspectors of the township; and the township board of school inspectors, to a great extent, are under the control and supervision of the county superintendent of schools. Subdivision 7 of Section 133 of the general school laws provides that it shall be the duty of the county commissioner of schools to counsel with the teachers and the school boards as to the course of study to be pursued and as to any improvement in the discipline and instruction in the schools. I point out these sections for the purpose of showing that the duties of these two offices are liable to conflict, and that it is against the spirit, if not the letter, of the law for one and the same person to hold both. It is against the policy of the law of this State for any one to hold two offices where there can be any possible question; and I am of the opinion that it should not be attempted so far as these two offices are concerned. Yours respectfully, HORACE M. OREN, Attorney General. |