Preliminary to further discussion of the recent judicial election in the nowly organizad Twenty-third cirouit we quote the following from the Detroit Tribune of last Mondny : Some of Mr. Tuttle's frienda in the Northwest are sending to the Democratie papers elabórate statements of elections held in new judicial circuits in the past in other yeura than those of the regular elections of all the circuit judges. We do not understand that this meets the point of the Attorney-Cieneral's deoision. Sectiou 20, of article vi is as folio ws : " The first election of the judges of the circuit courts shall ba held ou the first Mouday 111 April, one thousand oight hundred aud tiftyone, and every sixth year thereafter. Whenever an additional circuit is created, provisión shalt be made to hold the subsequent elections of such additional judges at tho regular elections herein proTided." As we undoratand the matter the AttorueyGeneral does not hold that this forbids an election of circuit judge to lili a new office or til a vacancy on ' the regular election day " oí the State (either in November of the even years or in April of the odd years). He holds, however, that it does prohibit a special election at other times. The only case m which the practico is against the Constitution is thal of the Eleventh circuit, which was orgauizei! in ISi'i.) and elected iU judge on the first Tuesduy of August of that year. Will the Tribune be so kind as to point us to that provisión of the Constitution - sectiou or clause - which prohibitB the Legislatura froin ordering the JirU election of a judge in a new circuit on any day it pienses ? Will it point us to the proof that the fint election for judge of the Eleventh circuit, hele the tirrit Tuesiliiy in August, 180"), was "against the Constitution?" Will it note the fact that the provisión of sec tion 20, quoted above, requiring " the fint election of judges of the oircui courts to be held on tho first Monday o April " appliod only to tüe first eleotion of judges under the Constitution o 1850, and spent its forco on the firs Monday of April, 1851 ? Will it also point U9 to the provisión that require an eleotion of a judge to fíll a vacancy, to be held on " the regular election day" in the " odd year " April or ' even year " Kovember, or " prohibit a special election at other times V When it does this we will concede the law creating the Twenty-third cir cuit unoonstitutional and the election of July 2 irregular, illegal, and void Meantiine we wish to suggest tha the words " regular elections," used in section 20, apply only to the " nibsequen election of such additional judges " anc not to the first election, which may b set down for any day the Legislatur may ohoose. The limitation of th provisión simply shortena the first term of new judges, or of judgeg in new cir cuits, and niakes the " subsequeut eleo tions " in such circuits take place on th same day as the for judges of the circuit referred to in section 20, - " every sixtl year " after the first Monday of Aprii 1861. The Legislature gets its authority to créate new oircuits under section 7 o article VI, from which we quote : " In every additional circuit established, th judge shall be elected by the electora of suc circuit, and his term of office shall continu asprovided in this Coiistitiition lor judges o the circuit court.' This clause certainly prohibits th Governor froin appointing the firt judge of a new circuit. He " shall be elected," and until he has been electec tbirn.""ïaybfla WtKrftfa&J3flT,8?I9 terminates the term of the first judg of a new or " additional circuit " at th sama time with the terins of the eigh circuit judges created by section 6, anc section 20 steps in and requires the "subsequent elections" in snch circuits to be held at the same time provided for the election of the suocessors of the origin al eigh t judges. That is all. It is unsafe for the Attorney-General to hinge his opinión upon a single section or clause. It may be that the almost uniform practice of the Legislature in creatinj new circuits has been to próvida for holding the first election on the first Monday of April. The practice was a good one, saving both expense and securing a more general expression of the will of the electors, nevertheless it is not a practice enjolned or made obligatory by any oonstitutional provisión, and the action of the Attorney-General and the Board of State Canvassers, holding the act unconstitutional and the election held under it void, is an unwarranted and high-handed violation of the laws prescribing and regulating their duties. We apprehend that a mandamus from the Supremo Court will bring the Attorney-General and the members of the Board to a realization of the fact that they have put their official " foot in it." In our humblo opinión - that of a .ayman and perhaps not of the same egal forcé as a deoree of the Supreme Court - Judge Tuttle having received a majority of the votes polled July 2, at Jie election held pursuant to act 184 of :he session laws of 1877, wasduly eleoted, has been since the 16th day of July ;he judge of tho 23d oircuit, and may enter upon tbe discharge of the duties of that office despite the refusal of the Board of State Canvassers to canvas :he votos and deliver him " a copy of .heir determination as required by law." Che Suprema Court has already decided .hut the bal loes of the electors, and not he certifiuate of a board of canvassers, ;ive an elected officer title to office, and ie neud not wait a mandamus from the 3upreme Court at tho October term. We are at a loss to account for this admission of the Free Press made Auust 3 : " We have no hesitation in saying that we believe the position of Attorney-General Kirohner - that the election was not properly held and is herefore invalid - -is perfectly sound." t cannot be that our ootemporary had examined the whole subject. - The Lansing Republican of Tueslay saya that Gov. Croswoll has declined io appoint a judge for the Twen;y-third circuit, - for want of authority. jevel-headed. " Father Taft " wanted the Repubican nomination for Governor of Ohio, ut persistod in saying tbat he did n't. 'he convention took him at his word and nominated tho unknown West. Hon. Alex. D. Fkasek, the oldost meuibcr of the Detroit Bar, having ommenced the practice of law in that city in 1824, died on the evening of the 2d inst., aged 81 years and six months. kir. Fraser was a native of Scotland. For a most perfect specimen of combined " Miss Nancyism " and newspaper anterprise, commend us to the following local editorial paragraph cut from the Jacksou Citizen, - though only the Lord knows what paper the Jackson editor cut it from : " Uuder the new law of this State rolative to aclmowledgmeuta in deeda, mortgages, &c, iadies aigniag the same need not ' be exaoiined separate and apart from their aaid huabanda ' - a aensibl amendinent. Hereafterthe husband aud wifo will ' teverally acknowledge ' the signing of auch iuatruments to be their ■ tree act aud deed ; ' nothing more." The " new law " referred to was enacted in 1875, and being over two years oíd has reached the average age of laws in this day of biennial law tinkering and can't be considered " new" any longer. Besidos, it says nothing about " ladies," but in a direct and coinmon sense way comes straight to the point and says " married women." A little less refineraent would be a valuable acquisition to that paragrapher, to say nothiug of the years lost in making the valuable discovery in behalf of the " ladies."