The Albany register. [volume] (Albany, Or.) 1868-18??, 1872-11-08
The E.isigans Law Repeal, Vetoed.

IIle Governor Vi tIit kststVC vi OtC6Oh
has shown q zealto prevent the cor
rection Of past acts Of injustice, truly
energetic. Two years ago . Demo
cratic Legislature, disregaraing the
claims OF justice, md guided by q
burning desire to foster the interests Of
the Democratic newspapers, passed an
"Act to protect litigants. u was
copied from an Act Of a like char,c-
ter which had been enacted By q DEM
ocratic Legislature In California, and
las been commonly tIesignated as the
"I.itigant Law" BY tie operations
Of this law, 4 few Democratic journals
have been granted the exclusive privi-
lege Of publishing all legal advertise
ments required BY tile laws Of the
State. We say efcl,sire Tgf. for If
printed in any other Journal, the pub
lication would not amount to legal
one. For this. these ''select" Journals
have often charged the advertiser from
two to three times more for bis legal
advertisement than other papers would
have done. In the first place it took
away from the legal advertiser the
right of choosing his own medium, Or
paper, in which to advertise, and IN
the second place it compelled him to
pay more than dotlle as much as the
work was worth. So obnoxious and
unjust was this law regarded In Cali
fornia, that, in large degree, It In
fluenced the election Of a Republican
Governor and Legislature there at the
last election for State officers. Among
The first acts Of the latter. on assem-
bling. was the repeal Of this law, and
the repeal was swiftly signed BY the
newly elected Governor. This act met
with the appreciation Of every honest,
fair-tlealing man In California, and
was heartily applauded by such in
Oregon, who were fitniliar with its
injustice as seen by them In the practi-
cal workings Of their own law. Influ-
enced by this general feeling, our late
Legislature repealed the obnoxious
measure Of this State, some Democrats
voting with the Republicans for the
repeal. But. unfortunately for us, we
have n Democratic Governor. He; in
tiuenced bv one Of his marvellous swells
OF Democratic wisdom. vetoed it. In
this he has affected to discover that
the holding of the office OF q litigant
printer amounts to franchise vested
for the time named. He does not say
this Is his positive belief. for he csu-
tionsly uses an "lt'' in introducing the
proposition; l,ut the intention Of His
Excellency is evidently designed to
convey such impression. To show
that this proposition Is not good Dem
ocratic logic. we simply refer our
readers toan Actpassed no farther back
than two years ago byour then Demo-
cratic Legislature, by which certain
officers IN Portland, Police Judge, etc,
were turned ont of their offices long
before the time tor which the people
had elected them, had expired. Ifit
was not violation of the State Con-
stitntion to do that thing then. why
Il it so now? The difference is here :
Then, q Democratic Legislature did
the business. Now. the repeal comes
from Republican Legislature. This
Is the difference, and to Governor
Grover, and small demagogIes OF his
complexion, the difference amounts to
q justification, howmucllsoeyer the
contrary may appear to upright and
fair-1ealing men.