The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1883-02-08

in tins state where the court.
are or have ever been closed
Does the senator mean to say that be
cause the legislature prescribes q
method of procedure, and in it defines
and prescribes who are officers of this
state, that thereby the courts are
closed? The legislature has the right
to construe the constitution, to saw
who are officers. This has been done
in the fourth section of the act sought
to DE repealed.
But let us come to the consideration
OF the present aspect and intention of
TINS bill. 1t is directed against the
heads of the executive department.
either one or all of them.
ask the senator to state which
II Is, or is it all? Name the act which
the treasurer has refused to perform
is he in default? Is the comptroller
refusing to execute the duties of his
office, the attorney general or the COM
missioner of the land office? Here n
senator said the land commissioner
had withdrew some portions of the
public land from sale) That accounts
for the milk in the cocoanut. That is
the inspiration of their repeating act.
Suppose that two or more persons are
setting up adverse claims to land in
this state; that both have filed on
the land and had it SURVEYED
and returned the field notes to the
land office, and the commissioner
refuses to issue a patent to either.
Cannot the parties go into the district
court and on these field notes and
surveys maintain his action of tres
n
that this action can be maintained on
an equitable title. Then let the par
ties go into the courts for redress, and
not fight each other over the Shout
ders OF the land commissioner. Pass
this bill and we will see
the commissioner suspended between
two judicial writs-for one
party will try to drive him into action
by "A mandamus, while the other will
restrain him with the most gracious
writ of injunction. If this IS to be
done better abolish the land Office at
once, and say that the courts shall
run it, and that the peoples voice in
placing faithful servant there shall
be drowned in judicial DEGREES. Let
us go step farther. Suppose he
obeys the order and issues the patent
and that patent is carried to
the governor and the latter
refuses to sign it? Will he not
be in contempt of the court. What
will the court dop Why, put the gov
ernor in Jail until he purges himself
of the contempt. The same thing
would be done by the courts to anv of
the heads of departments who saw
proper in the line of his duty, and in
his judgment and discre.
ton, should he disobey the order for
or mandamus, and thus
the judicial power of the government
would step in and override all other
powers-would in fact run
the government, and the very evil
provided against in the constitution
would befall the country-persons be-
ing OF one department would usurp
the powers of the other, and the
whole executive department of this
great state would be bound hand and
foot to the judicial power-the gov
ernor driven from the duties of his |
high office to answer and obey writs,
or go prisoner to the common Jail, |
should he disobey them. Let us be |
to the men who could see into |
the future far enough to provide |
against such monstrouS evil by a
wise distribution of the powers of
and making each indie
pendent of the other.
1t is said that the land commissioner
has withdrew lands from sale, there
fore he ought to subject to mandamus.
am glad to learn that the people
have man in the land Office who has
the honesty and the nerve to stand
between the people and the
swarm of land spectators and
land syndicateS. The people placed
him there for that purpose and many
Il child yet unborn win rise up to
bless his name for saving to them a
portion at least of the rich heritage
bequeathed to them by the fathers of
the republic. l recollect a few years
ago there was man in the cOmptrol-
Tres Office in this state who stood
firm us rock, even against
judicial orders, when there was
a tremendous pressure brought
against him to issue certain bonds to
a mammoth corporation in this state.
That man was A. Bledsoe, and his
name will live in Texas history
all time as an honest man
and just and true officer, who stood
like a stone wall between the people
and the awful burden of an iniqui-
tous and monstrous subsidy, to meet
the demands of which the tax gath
ereI would have been bleeding our
people thfs--adaay. W. G. Walsh
has been equally hrm and
true in resisting the organ
lied powers to absorb all the pullic
land in this state. The people made
him their guardian to keep and pre-
serve this great trust, and in him they
have not been deceived. He has stood
unawed amid all the efforts to intimi-
date with threats of mandamus from
courts, and the people still hold the
public lands.
The senator from Cook says that
when the act of 1881 was read to
federal judge he laughed in the
faces of the attorneys. The time
will come when the people may weep
WHEN federal judge laughs at the
statute laws of a state. The tendency
Of the federal power is to encroach
upon the states, and destroy them.
And. If the wolves of Capitalization
must engr1f us. ! do hope that
Texas will go down amid the pillows.
clinging with unfaltering faith to her
own rights and her own laws. Then,
sir, leave off as L began. that OPP
pose this measure, for the reason that
it will place An independent and CO.
ordinate department of our state gov
eminent in the power and control of
another, thing that the constitution
expressly forbids.
Mr.. Matlock said: desire to give
the reasons why | will vote to repeal
this law under consultation. was
in the legislature that passed that
law and voted for it. l then doubted
the wisdom of it, and since seeing its
evil effect, have always intended to
cast my vote against il if l had the
opportunity. 1t was made the law
during a political excitement, and, as
/ understood it at the time, to prevent
federal judges from interfering with
state elections, and was passed In
haste and without due consideration.
and without taking into considera
ton the fact that it would he pro-
ductive of wrong upon individual
rights. The senator from Harris lays
down the proposition that the repeal
of the law is not necessary and that
if it was it is not expedient to repeal
it at this time, and in support of his
proposition refers to article III of the
constitution, that divides the govern
eminent into three distinct depart
ments, viz: the legislative, executive
and judicial, and asserts that the re-
peal of this law will make these de-
partments dependent upon each
other when it is the express will of