Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1883-06-08


noy to the argument Of Mr.. Sears on ths
plea to the Jurisdiction and the demurrer t,
the charges against the State Prison Direct
ors, before the Executive Commission. is a
follows:
ARGUMENT OF HON. GEORGE T. FLoURSoY.
Mr.Flo1rnoy.- My argument in regard TO tbe
Magma Charta bad no reference TO that al
all. l am much Obliged 10 counsel for re
terring to the Texas case. l argued tba
myself. l am glad he has called my atten
aon to it. Here ia what the Court said. auG
it is good law:
In cur opinion, however, the sounder
a)nciusion is, that where there is a grant OF
power 10 the Cons iiudon to q department Of
Government, as to a Constitutional or statu-
tory othcer. or tribunal, without efiaing the
meaner and form on or by which it Is to bf
exercised and carried into tffsct, the Isgisls-
ture may legiimately prescribe reasonable
rules by which this may be done, And
though such power maY not be taken away
By the Legislature, and should IL fail or
refuse to legislate os to provide for the
efficient use and exercise cf the power. the
department, oticer. or tribunal to whom it is
delegated might possibly act 10 accordance
with It's own discretion, yet when ths Iagis-
lature has made reasonable and appropriate
provisions for it's proper exercise It should
and viii be exercised in conformity with such
provisions
Now their position is that .he Act Of 1880
has taken away the power from this Court
The Legislature had no power TO take il
away. 1t is ths correct doctrine, as stated in
the decision. This is exactly our position in
this case. Not that it can take away the
power that the Constitution coufers upon the
Executive; not that the Executive of the
State can abandon bis constitutional duties,
because 10 Court can, by agreement Of coun-
sci. or by Act Of the Ls9islsture or in any
other way, take the jurisdiction which the
Constitution cOnfers upon the Executive
They talk about going before Judge McEar-
land, or somebody else, TO try this case |
have too much respect for the Superior
Courts of this State to imagine that any one
OF them would entertain for moment any
such proposition, ! know very well If they
did entertain it, they would go beyond
their constitutional powers. We cane
give them any such power. Not only that,
but you cannot take that power from the
Governor Of this State. Il csnnOt be- done
by agreement il cannot be done by statute,
it can't be done at all don't know hoR 80
answer the argument In sny other way. II
is q simple proposition. There is no doubt
about the nearing Cf Article X. OF the Con.
stituhon. 1ne power OF removal is placed ia
the Governor plaiuly aud distinctly. Can
the Legislature confer that power upon the
Superior Courtsg Why, the absurdity Of the
proposition that Court is to deliberately sit
and hear testimony upon a matter upon
which it cannot enter decree. Is it possible
that "a lawyer can boldly contend that alter
theConsiitution Of this State says the Co7er1or
shall have the power to do this thing, that the
Legislature csn by agreement or stipulation
intruss IL to tho hands OF the sur ueriOr
Court, or any other tribunal. Even if the
Executive IS willing. can lawyer say that
the Executive can abandon his oath Of offics TO
support the Constitution o' the State for fe T
of the responsibility or anything of that sort !?
The thiug is infinitely absurd. The Gov
ernor shall have the power to hear these
charges, not the Courts. Who can change
this The people have said this. 1t is new
Il said it was new, but it is here. 1t is new.
but II is part of the Constitution which the
Governor is sworn to support, sid your
Honor is sworn 70 support. 1t is there, and
we can't avoid it. 1t says the Governor shall
have the power to remove either of the Di-
Eectors. When? After on opportunity to
be heard. Where? Who hears it I said
yesserdsy-and it = not denied-thst the
power to determine involves the power
TO hear and the power to hear necessarily
carries with Ii the power to decree and make
judgment, and not even my distinguished
friend will undertake 20 answer that pr0po-
sition, becsuse l. cannot be answered. The
Governor solely and alone having the power
TO act, must find the facts upon which he
acts.
They say the fourteenth amendment to the
Constitution of the United States SAYS no.
body shall be deprived Of the equal protec-
ton of the law. | don't appreciate the force
Of that argument. | am perfectly familiar
with the sections quoted from Cooley. He
says due process OF law is an opportunity to
be heard. IL certainly wonld not be due
process Of law to violate the Constitution
and take these people away from before the
Governor and carry them before a Superior
Court Of this State, who could not entertain
II, whether agreed or not agreed. What DO
you want me to do2 would be the response Of
the Superior Judge. Counsel say, we want
you to hear the evidence in this case. With
jury, perhsps. What are they to do They
are to say whether these people are incompe-
tent or not. or have neglected their duty, or
been guilty of misconduct. Where do / get
the authority TO do it ? says the Judge. The
Constitution saws the Governor shall handle
shis branch OF the business. Suppose the
Judge does It, what is the result The jury
brings in verdict that they are guilty O!
this or that specification. What am 1 to do
says the Judge. Am l a commissioner to
take testimony Is that the province Of this
Court? Am / appointed by law, or am l az
commissioner to take testimony If l am,
where do get NY authority TO whom dc
I report, and when I report, who respects
thst report, and who is called upon TO Tespsc
it, There is nothing in the matter worth
talking about.
The closing argument was made by Hon
A. L. Hart on behalf of the Directors.
ARGUMENT or HON. A. L. HART.
Mr.. Hart-May it please you Excellency
and your Honor The discussion of this con
stitutional provision has consumed so much
time, that shall be SIS brief as possible il
the presentation Of three propositions, either
of which l think defeats the power of the
Governor to hear and determine this matter
And in objec.ing to the exercise Of this power
by the Governor, it is not with view Of
Sinking the responsibilities that might fol
low that which il alleged to be misconduct II
office, but 4 Is only su attempted assertion Of
s right which we believe TO be fundamental
and founded upon the original Magma Charta
adopted when the trainers Of this Constitu
tiOn adopted republican form OF govern
msnk
For the purposes of this argument I shall
undertake 10 prove by reference to funds.
mental principles that it was not the inten.
tion Of the trainers Of the Constitution 90 coz
fer this power upon The Executive. And in
coustruipg an instrument Of this natuie we
are jusd6abls iu going back to Grst princi.
plss. to tie contaxs snd the subj ,ct-matter
of the legislation. The claim OF the other
side is what! II Is q proposition which !
think, addressed % Constitutional Convsu.
tion, whose duty i was 70 frame fun3a.
mental law in any Of the American States,
would be taken 20 BE- roustr0us, because in
opposition TO ali the views Of all the states
men and iulists who have ever spoken upon
the nature of the American GoyerImsut and
Of the government OF the several States. The
ur1positian il, frat. that the Governor Of this
State. IS the Executive. hss the power
70 Law charges against officials who have been
appointed hy him. and cite the parties to sp-
near. thus becoming sn actor in the proceed
ING itself-to sit in Judgment upon his sntsS.
onist whom be has charged with an set that
is wrong, snd upon renderingIthe Judgment,
70 execute it himself. II is claimed by coun-
sci on the other side that it Is compatsnt for
the State to confer upon single individual
sIl of the powers Of the Government except
ing the legislative power; and, indeed, ludg'
ing from the rules that have been adopted IN
this case, and the argument made by my
learned friend who lsss occupied the hOor, i
Ia also competent to confer the legislstivs
mower as well as the executive and judicial
powers upon q single individual. And i;
may not be Gus of place for me
70 saw here that all Of the learning,
md traditions, and doctrines OF the party to
which nv learned friend belongs. are in op.
position to the idea that there msy be organ.
zed within the American Government, OF
- - -