Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1881-03-28
Aanrastcr futel!:genccr.
MONDAY EVENING, MARCH %, 1881
A Question of Taste and Law.

MONDA1 EvEN1NGs MAhCA 20 Io0l
A Question of Taste and Law.
Some of the lawyers in the Legislature
take exception to the action of the state
treasurer and auditor general IN calling
upon the attorney general for advice as
to the constitutionality Of the law giving
. per diem pay to the members beyond
the hundred days, and to that of the at
torney general in undertaking to decide
the question propounded to him. Senator
Stewart, who is a lawyer Ofmuch ability
and man of spotless repute, declared
in the Senate that since the acts of the
Legislature are presumed to he constitu-
tional the state treasurer, who is but an
executive official, must pay such war
rants as are drawn on him by the speakers
of the two bodies of tho Legislature pur-
suant to the law, and that the only
proper way to prohibit such payment is
by mandamus from the supreme court.
He declares that the attorney general
would have acted more properly if he
had replied to the officers consulting him
that /" it does not concern you whether
this act is constitutional or not; the act
of Assembly provides that you shall pay
upon certain warrants :" and they should
pay them unless inhibited by the
supreme court.
That may be good law, but we do not
believe it is. It may have been a more
decorous way Of proceeding, but we can
not admit even that. Nor can we con-
cede that Senator Stewards construction
is the sensible one. To us it seems that
the state officers, just like each citizen,
are amenable to the law and to be gov
erned by it. The question with every
one, in considering his acts, must he, ''is
it lawful ?" If he does not know, his
proper course is to consult his legal
counsel. Just this the auditor general
and state treasurer did. Their proper
counsel was the attorney general. The
law imposes upon him the duty of an
swering the questions OF these officers
about their official acts. 1t therefore
makes it their duty to consult him con-
cerning them when they are in doubt.
Now, what can more surely invalidaie
the law than it's uncOnstitutionality? ? II
in violation of the fundamental law, an
act of Assembly is absolutely void and
commands the obedience of no one. How
then can it command that of the state {
servants, though they are but its ex'
eeutive officers? 1t is just by those Off
GERS that the laws need to be construed
for it is their province to execute them.
It seems to be quite untenabIe to hold
that they are obliged to blindly accept
the statutes upon faith, and to suppress
doubts they may have of their cOnstit,.'
tionality; and this, though it be sug
gested that they do so in obedience tt
the demand of a supposed "good taste.
An officer of the people has no bushes:
to consider 4 question Of good taste in
constituting u question of law. 1t may
be in better taste for a servant to obey
his master and to leave the question OF
the lawfulness of his act TO him to deter
mine. But this is not where the Law
leaves the responsibility. A wife ma!
excuse her criminality 10y alleging hel
husbands duress but not mans ser
want, nor the peoples.
UnqucstiOnably the supreme court is
the final arbiter of the question of :
laws constitutionality. But that in nc
way relieves an officer of the state from
the duty of deciding upon his primary ac.
tion according to the best light he can get
We hold that in this case it was lawful
right and becoming" for the auditor
general and state treasurer to ask an.
for the attorney general to answer, upol
all the facts made public. If, rs i
charged, they had a sinister design i;
their action, to cause an early adjourn
ment of the Legislature and SO defeat
legislation they wanted defeated, thel
they certainly were not honest and are no
tObe commended. But only on this grount
is their condemnation possible and tha
allegation needs to be proved before it i
entitled to credit. 1t is quite as cas-,
for The members of the Legislature tt
ask the supreme court to construe a Law
they have passed in their own favor, a
it is for the states executive officers to d
So; and quite as becoming, if not a littl
more so.
Defective Legislation.
When there is good deal of hurr.