Arizona citizen., 1876-01-29


 reaches far beyond the parties of re
 cord, to every county of the Territory
 to decide this, not by taking judicis
 knowledge of such @ law, by e1amin.
 ing the printed statutes, or the offic'
 of the properly appointed custodian oi
 the original copies of laws passed, mol
 even from the proved action of the
 Legislature in considering such law,
 but solely from the stipulation of the
 parties.
 We hold that parties to sn action
 cannot properly stipulste what the
 law is, that is to govern their case, and that courts should not regard
 such stipulstions when made, and we are equally of the opinion that they cannot stipulste what the action of 6 law-making body was in given case, and from the stipulstioDs thus made, ask the court to determine whether @ general law is, or is not in force.
 The agreement of parties that a statute with certain provisions is in force, does not make it in force. The agreement of parties that @ law-mak- ing body did certain things when con- sidering bill, even though the things they agree between them to have been done, were all that were necessary in the opinion of court tol constitute its passage, does not con- stitute the bill of law.
 In deciding the issue raised, which we think would have been better rais- ed by demurrer, than by answer, we shall not regard the stipulstions. l Was there then, a law of the Territory | of Arizona, authorizing the election of Probate Judge in Maricopa county as alleged in the complaint! There is no such law among the published laws of the Territory. There is no copy of such law in the office of the Secretary of the Territory. the officer who IS the lawful custodian of the original bills that have been properly passed. Not finding any evidence of the existence of such law, in the pub lished laws, or in the office of the Secretary. is it competent for the court to examine the journals of the two Houses of the Legislature and seek there to find evidence of such law having been enacted and still in force? The language of the authorities, as in leading case, (30th 252, is that, "The result ,f the authorities clearly is, that when- ,ver 6 general statute Is miscredited, ,r its existence denied, the question is o be tried and determined by the ,ourt as s question of law. There is 10 plea by which its existence can bel put in issue and tried as a question of act. In the same case it was held: That the court in passing upon theI 'slidity of law that appeared smongj he published laws, that it would not the journal or tho enrolled ,ills to see if it was published ss pass d.
 If it is not competent in such case 0 examine the journal, or enrolled ill, to verify or alter the published aw it appears to us still more certain hat the same rule should govern in 8 ase like the present, where there is otal absence of any evidence of Legis- alive action upon the law in question. f the enrollment, standardization nd depnsiting with the Secretary of tate is conclusive that law has sssed, the want of all these things nay be conclusive that there is no nch law.
 It appears to the court that it was ever intended that the Journals of body were to be regarded 8 evidence to the courts, as to what .ws were enacted by them, and that
 court Tn a merely collateral issue 'ould not be warranted in declaring
 general law in force on such evil ence alone. The presumptions of w all are, that if the Legislature sd passed the law under considers on, the same would have appeared mong the published laws, or at least ley would have seen that the Secre- ny of the Territory was provided ith an enrolled copy thereof. We are lerefore of tho opinion that on the rst Monday in May 1875 there was 3 law of the Territory authorizing le election of a Probate Judge
 Msricops county, and that the cleo on so held, was without authority law and was void. It follows from lese conclusions that the judgment the district court must be affirmed Ut upon views in some respects diff rent from those which seem to have revsiled in the court below.
 Judgment affirmed.
 DEFoREsr PORTER, Associate Justice. 7. A. TWEED, Associate Justice.