The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1882-02-09
NO REASON IN A FUSS ABOUT III.

Some of the papers appear to mis-
understand the acquired independ-
ence of state department. The
constitution makes the governor,
the comptroller, the teasurer and the
land commissioner executive OFF,
GERS. When the International rail-
way company asked for the issuance
of bonds under the law of the
twelfth legislature, giving ten
thousand dollars per mile to
said company, and when Gov
ernor Davis and Treasurer
Honey had signed these bonds and
the comptroller had refused to sign
them, application was made for
mandamus requiring the comp
troller to sign them. Before the
"semi-colOn" court had the oppOr-
tunity to consider the appeal, the
Davis government was displaced by
the Coke government, and new
supreme court was organized. This
court was composed of Chief Justice
Roberts and Associate Justices
Moore and Reeves. Judge Moore
considered himself disqualified, be-
cause of his attorneyship for the
company, at time previous to his
connection with the bench, and
he refused to act as one OF
the court considering the company's
appeal. Judge Ferris was appointed
in his place for this special service,
and Justices Roberts, Reeves and
Ferris, sitting as the supreme bench,
came to the conclusion that the SUI
preme court had no jurisdiction in
the case, since it was asked that
coordinate branch of the govern
ment direct another independent CO.
ordinate branch, through one of its
department heads, to do a thing,
when the constitution had distinctly
delegated to this head of depart
ment the right TO do as he pleased !;
in other words, that the comptroller
was n court within himself,
made supreme and Independent
of any judicial decree or opinion of
the state supreme court, whose con-
stitutional powers were distinctly
defined as no greater in respect to
such a case than that of the comp
troller, this officer having already
issued his supreme dictum. 1t is
singular but true, therefore, that
Justice Roberts was q party to this
very decision which is at the bottom
of this conflict between Governor
Roberts and Comptroller Brown.
True, it was unanimous opinion of
the supreme bench which declared
that mandamus could not issue
to the head of department,
and the decision was based upon
what the court claimed to be the
plain letter of the constitution. Ger
tainly, therefore, this difference of
opinion between these two execu-
tive officers should be other than
a misunderstanding. The law and
the supreme court have delegated
to the comptroller the very right he
assumes, and since it is an evil fea-
ture in our state prominent that
one executive officer can thus set
himself up as coordinate supreme
state power, the governor and all
other good people should devote
themselves to the task OF speedily
securing a change in the constitu-
tion, remedying the dangerous de-
feet. The power now placed in
the hands of a state executive
officer is most dangerous, and un-
less the evil be corrected, some self
important officer, wanting to ere
ate a profound sensation, will some
day simply stop the machin-
sly of the state government, to
" how much power is really in
ho" ~ one man.
rested /.