The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1881-02-27
soc EFT TU EN-.
SALT LAKE CITY, Feb. &c. 1881.

lN-H LAAo NAAthHlCl UOG uCClSHEu
for critic professionals, but for Ordin-
airy nOn-profeSsional mortals. Put
ting his mandamus matter into plain
language for plain people, who in
fact constitute large portion
of the community, it runs this
Way-The court was asked to COM
pei Acting Governor Thomas TO give
George G. Cannon a certificate in
laccOrdanc with the undenied and I'M
deniable fact that he received the
4 largest number of votes for delegate
to Congress. The court said it did
mot know that Secretary Thomas
was acting-gOYernOr, and If he was
it could not compel him TO do his
duty and give certificate to the cleo
ted candidate, The governor, who
ever he might be, could do just as he
liked about it-cOuld take his own
way of counting the votes and judg-
ing of their value, and consequently
could give certificate or withhold
it, could give it TO Tom, Dick or
Harry, ccOrdIng TO his own whim,
or discretion, as the court termed
it, and it was nobOdy's business IN
law or equity.
The governor could regard or dis
regard, keep or break, respect Or de-
| fly the law, just as the fit may come
upon him, for he was altogether
above and beyond the law in such
matters, and the court could not
touch him. He was the one imper-
ial citizen for whom laws and
tTnrrvfc- .yaFv do 4 oil
except in so far as he might choose
to subordinate them to the further
ance of his own purposes.
This is all very peculiar and funny.
Let US look at 1t minute. The
court did not know who was gov
ernOr de .fGct0. That may be so,
but everybody else appeared to
know. 1t is hardly presumable that |
Secretary Thomas had repudiated
the gOvernOrShip. If he is a little
man, he is scarcely small enough
for that. However, courts may be
very ignorant institutions, for there
is no law requiring them to know
more than they are obliged to know,
and if it is not law it may be custom
for a court though wise and know
ing and oracular enough at times, to
write itself down an ignOramus at
its own option, and as often as may
seem to itself convenient.
The law plainly required of the
Governor to give certificate to the
candidate who had received the
highest number of votes, and al
lowed his eXcellency no discretion
in doing. That was the whole duty i
of the Governor in the business,
and a governor who had the slight
est regard for either law or Justice
would have given the certificate to
Mr.. Cannon without any paltry !
bubble or intriguing hesitation. Il
The court held that the Governor L
could go any way and anywhere he
pleased to ascertain how many votes
were cast and for whom. The Gov
eTnOr could not do any such Il thing.
There was only one way and one
where for him to know, ard they
were as provided by law. The law I
provided for holding the election,
and for the returns of the same to
be sent to and received by the secre- Y
Uary, who was the only authorized !
person from whom the Governor Y
could obtain the entire vote of the
territory according to law. The
Governor had no discretion i'll this
matter. To say that he had may
be grand law in some prejudiced
peoples eyes, but to sensible peOplei
it Is pure puerility, perfect childish l
ness, if it is not wilful wickednesS. t
r Tho fNnr~nr-y,rr. no,,1l I'LL
any way he pleased how the cleo J
ton went, what was the use of the .
law requiring the returns to be sent {
to the secretary for that purpose, :
among others? If the Governor !
could please himself about accept !
leg the legal returns, or any part of ,
them, of what use were they? If {
he was really an irresponsible Judge
Of the election and according to his +;
own methods, what was the use of :
having an election? For he could +
nullify it at his pleasure, no matter :
how it went. He could send whom
he pleased to Congress, or have no. :
body sent there. He could give the {
or not give it. He could I
give 1t to the person having the 8
highest or the person having the
lowest number of votes. He could
give it to somebody having no vote
at all. And it was nObOdy'S bust
ness withal. The Governor could 7
exercise his elastic discretion" in
the matter, you know. If / under T
stand things, this was the logic of /
the court. !
Suppose the Governor had refused
to give anybody a certificate, how :
then? There could have been no
delegate, and no contest for the
The man who has the
is not entitled to it by any
rule of law. If he had not received |
one vote, his right to the certificate
and his title to the delegateship /
would have been just as clear and s
as perfect as they are now. So far q
as the people are concerned, he is c
he is no representative nor
delegate of theirs, but the fact of
his having certificate, though OBJ
.ained by indubitable fraud, gives
him seat in the house, and makes r
he contest for the seat possible.
The court said it had no power to
compel the Governor to do his duty. 1
Well, perhaps it had not, and perhaps c
it did not want to have, it would 1
have decided that it had the power,
for it conceded that there were pre- l
,edentS on both sides of The question. c
But circumstances alter cases some
times, even in courts, especially |
courts in territories, and more I
when the MOrmons are S
On one side and their enemies on
-he other. c
1t has been said that language was I
for the purpose of con- {
cealing our ideas, and it may be I
said that law and courts and |
governors were invented
for the purpose of hindering and
and preventing justice, 2
for all that they frequently do.
Courts apparently rejoice when they
bolster up their unjust and illogical
decisions by adopting the pettifog-
ging resorts of hairsplitting caSUiS-
try and frivolous technicalitieS.
If the Judiciary declare that the
can do no wrong, that he
is above the law and beyond the
reach of the courts, what is the
natural effect on the community?
Common people will regard thel
-