Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1883-06-07

precedent hazna Charta Was wrung from that
msrc;ees desPot BY an outraged and oppressed Peo-
pie In 1915. VIII the Executive OF this free people
follow counsel IN his giddy light backward into the
DARK despotic ages Of xix hundred Years to ind
precedent for this unheard OF proceeding II SO,
fesr it will be considered q usurpatiou of power
UNIV arrznted By asy theory custom OF republican
government. A division Of departments into three
coordinate branches OF government, independent OF
each other, the fundamental principle which
controlled the Fathers They engrafted It INTO all
OF the Constitutions, and he who attempts
to disturb it violates the traditions OF the
nation, and strikes a blow at civil liberty.
The heroes, statesmen and iurists who organized
and established this republic wars unbelievers ID
the " divine right Of kings" They abhoEred des-
potie power, but cherished persona liberty, and ee-
waited the rights Of man, and around those rights
they placed these safeguards by division OF pow
ers Suppose our Constitution had said, The CIV
ernor shall have the power to execute a murderer
after an opportunity 10 be heard upon written
charges. Would the counsel for the people claim
that the Executive could try him; that the Gov.
ernor could sit as Court aud pass sentence ara
then execute it IL power be given 10 the TX
ecutye 10 try and determine by judicial process any
person for the crime Of +" misconduct in office, ne
the crime cannot affect the question Of Jurisdiction
The more resolve this question IN cur mind,
the more monstrous it seems. We shall wait with
deep anxiety the decision OF the Executive IN this
| case, and hope that he will conform To the estab
lished rules cf American jurisprudence; ripened
with age given 10 us by Marshall, Story and ether
eminent iurists which is embellished by their pure
thought and made infiexible by their learning and
wisdom, around which there clusters a hallowed
reverence in the heart of every American citizen,
and which is the admiration Of the people Of other
countries,
At the conclusion of Mr. Sears argument, Col
onel Flournoy replied by stating that counsel had
simply argued that the Legislature in enaclng Sec
ton 7I2 Of the Penal Code, had taken from the
Governor the power to perform a constitutional
duty. He read Texas decision referred to by Mr..
Sears, in which it laid down thst pogsr
could deprive an official of constitutional duty.
and ia the absence OF law to guide him the said
official had a right to exercise his own discretion.
1t absurd to talk about carrying this matter
into the Superior Court. The idea that Court
could be asked to take testimony without the power
| to enter judgment, degree order, was absurd.
he could talk about the point made a long While,
but there nothing whatever in it.
A. l. Hart closed the argument for the defense.
Ee said the Interpretation placed upon this consti
tutonal provision by counsel for the people to
confer the Governor the power to prefer charges
against the Prison Directors to try and determine
the charges, and then to execute them. This was
blending the legislative, judicial and executive
powers. All the traditions of the party to which
Fiournoy belonged, be said, were opposed to such
construction.
At the conclusion of Mr.. Harris argument the
Commission tSok recess until 10 4. to-day, init
mating that at that hour written decision on the
demurrer would be filed.