Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1883-04-23


with judicial powers, which iudiciously
determined questions involved, and to
whose decisions the people yielded volun-
tary obedience. That judicial decision
avoided the horrors of civil war. The DO
htlcal department of the government, to
which so much reference has been made in
this case, stood appalled, and impotent in
the race OF great dangers, and yet we are
asked to abdicate our functions, to deny
our Jurisdiction, and to leave the question
OF an amendment to the constitution, un-
less voluntarily acquiesced in, to be
determined by a resort to arms. We
ought to ponder long before we
adopt a doctrine so fraught with
danger to republican institutions. All
the danger lies in the line of argument of
appellants attorney. Courts can never
overturn our institutions or subvert our
liberties. They command neither the
peace nor the sword of the state, but the
people which is educated to disrespect the
decision and disregard the adjudications
of the courts, is prepared for anarchy with
all its attendant evils and dreadful conse-
quences.
We may perhaps be excused if in the in
terest of social order and public security
and permanency of republican institu-
tions, we enter a most earnest protest
against the heresies which have been ad-
vanced in this case.
The court then refers TO cases cited by
the appellant - Peters 4l4; 5 Blatchford,
u, -, Wallace GIG, and others, and points
out where they differ from the case at the
bar. The court quotes from rs Pennsyl-
vaEia state, as applicable here: That
there are bat three known modes by which
the whole people Of the state can give
assent to an alteration of an existing law
ful form Of government. The first mode
is provided IN the existing constitution;
the second IN constitutional conventions;
the third revolution of a people vino are
under an organized government. They
cannot change it unless in an authorized
manner.
No heresy has ever been taught IN this
| country so fraught with evil as the doc
| trine that the people have a constitutional
right to disregard the constitution. 1.
tends to revolution and anarchy. It is
incumbent upon all who influence and
mould public opinion to repudiate so dam
gerous a doctrine, before it bears fruit de-
struotive of republican institutions.
The court then says the authority without
conflict is that not only must a constitu-
| tion be amended in the manner prescribed
| in the existing constitution, but it is com
petent for the courts to inquire whether in
| the adoption of the amendment the pro-
visions of the existing constitution have
| been observed. The voice of the people
can only be of legal force when expressed
in the manner pointed out by themselves
in their constitution. Here the court cites
numerous authorities in support of this
doctrine.
| The second question raised was that the
| Judgment of the nineteenth general as
sembly on the proceedings of the eight
eenth general assembly are conclusive and
cannot be renewed. On this point the
court discusses all the authorities cited by
the counsel, and says in their opinion the
! question involved in the case at the bar
does not fall within the principle laid down
| by such authorities.
| Having disposed of this question the
court shows wherein the provisions of the
constitution relating to it's amendment
were not complied with. 1t was claimed
in the argument that certain paper!
produced cured the defects shown by the
records of the legislature. The records
are the ultimate and conclusive proof o.
the proceedings of the Legislature. I
would be a startling doctrine indeed if i
should be held that the journals of th
general assembly could be c0ntradicted b!
a paper produced upon the street three
years after the action was had, by person
who will not permit his name to be dis
closed, and whom the court is not permit
ted to know. We might we'll tremble OF
the permanency of our constitution
if such proceeding could b.
sanctioned. It is matte
of the greatest regret that a paper should
have been brought in this case so clearly
not entitled to legal consideration, ant
which could have no other effect than *
further infame and excite en- already ex
cited and inhamed public mind. If all th'
obstacles in the way of sustaining tn
amendment already considered could b.
overcome, there are still others in the way
likely to be unanswerable.
In concluding the court says: Placing
the most liberal construction upon tn
provision of the constitution, under th
consideration of which it is suscepti
BILE, we think it requires at least that en-
tries upon journals shall show the term
of the amendment submitted. This i.
not shown upon the journal either of the
senate or the house of the eighteenth
general assembly. We have approache
aud discr ssed this grave question with ful
appreciation of the esponsibility which
invites, and we have given to its considera
ton the earnest attention whic
Its importance demands. We hav
sought to maintain the supremacy c
the constitution at whatever hazards.
is for the protection of the minorities tha
constitutions are framed. Sometimes con
stitutions must be interposed for the pro
lection of majorities, even against them
selves. Constitutions are:adopted in time
of public repose, when sober reason hold
her citadel, and are designed for the loss {
, few years in nothing.
The constitution is the palladium of RI
publican freedom. The young men con
4 ing forward upon the stage of political al
5 tion must be educated to venerate i
g Those already upon the stage must
l taught to obey it. Whatever interests ma
5 be advanced or Fay suffer, whoever {
whatever may be voted up or voted dow
= no sacrilegious hand must be laid upon Il
: constitution.
g Abidingly and firmly convinced of IL
e correctness of our former conclusio
| rnnOOni1ipry tho cunori0r hirbar than ri