The Bad Lands cow boy. [volume] (Little Missouri, Dakota [i.e. N.D.]) 1884-1886, 1884-09-25
THE CAPITAL QUESTION.

Decision OF the Supreme Court of
the Territory, Aft rmir1g the
Constitut,onality Of the ACT
Creating the Capital
Commission. B
The Decree Prepared by Judge Church,
and Chief Justice Edgerton's Dissent
ing Opinion, Covering all Points.
Yankton, Oak, Special Telegram, Sept 20. ~
This morning Judge Edgerton opened the ter
ritorial supreme court for the purpose Of filing
the opinion of the different justices on cases
argued atthe Last term. The most important
was the celebrated capital commission case, IN
which Judges Hudson, Church and Palmer re-
versed Judge Edgerton's decision and declared
the law q good and valid one. The opinion Of
the majority was prepared by Judge Church
and is an interesting document, covering sixty
three pages Of legal cap Judge Church says
the Importance Of the case and great interest
felt in It in all sections Of the territory, caused
him to 20 into the matter fully and make the
opinion of the majority 30 clear that the popular
mind would readily understand it, Judge Ed
gerton's dissenting opinion is tquite 30 long,
but is strong paper, and well represents the
respondents view Of the case. Both opinions
are well fortified with references to confirm
various points mnde. While these opinions
are .differentsin form from the argument OF the
respective attorneys, they arc much the same
reader is forcibly reminded of the brilliant
arguments made by Col. Villas for the appellant
and Moody Trip and Gallagher for the re-
Bpondent d Judge Church first defines the res
laion Of d territory to the general. government
and thegeneral power Of the territorial slegis-
cusses the provision made in the organic act
for changing the location of the sent Of govern
ment 4; III W 5t$s \: iis ;-3
: The organic act provides a temporary scat Of
government, vests Legislative power in the
governor and Legislative assembly, and ex-
iegialation Recognizing that tie center Of
population and commerce might shift, con-
gress wisely provided that the seat of govern
mont, after having been located, was still sub,
ject to change by the governor and legislative
assembly. & is admitted, therefore, that the
location could be; changed had the place been
named in the bill /; but, the ohangemade by the
new commissio is objected to Jon the
ground Of the delegation Of delegated pow,
ers. The territory is large, and the session Of
the legislature limited to sixty days. It was
therefore inexpedient for the legislature, either
n body Or BY committee, e, selects new 70; 9;
subjects Of Legislation, end as the full scope
and purposes of pertinent sections OF the Re-
| vised Statutes of congress was to delegate to
the people Of the territory power to. legislate
upon matters pertaining to their own local
self -goyernment-po powers which, by the way,
passage OF the capital removal bill cannot be
regarded as nm enlargement of the general leg
lslatve power conferred +
References were given showing il5w capitals
Of states and territories and county seats had
been located and how congress had delegated
to raise armies, grant letters of lnarque and re-
prissl borrow money and to do other acts Of q
almilar nature u &. ~ 5S
saBut this, says the judge, sscannot be con
sidered 9 case Of delegated authority as it was
complete. Tho law as passed merely provided
agents to perform certain administrative acts
which the legislature could not itself conyen-
lently perform. In regard to the objection
That the commission having been named in the
bill had not been regularly appointed, 1t was
enough to say that the commissioners were not
strictly officers. Their duties were specific and
united Having performed the work designated
they ceased to be in office. r 38
THE CHIEF JUSTICES Dissent. MI.
I. From Judge Church opinion Chief Justice
A1AaCA u16o0utb ahy6.Q9 uu80leF TO
eethat the case nessasiIy involves DISCUS
sion of any serious tional question; to
him the proposition seems so plain go elemen--
larry and tho questions leading up to the princi
pal question 80 thoroug hly settled by judicial
decisions and 80 uncon tested By text writers,
Tho question 10 not as toi the power 81 con-
gress oyer the sub hui s,ofegasgu
EEhis power to Belect and establish and change
sha saat q geyeIIne nt, the governor and
my implied authority ii those tribunals to
lgain alegate duty 70 any other tribunal
body or persons. II; s.
Tie chief justics then proceeds 81 some length
70 show that:in the passage Of the capital bill
snch deleeahonspf power Was made, and that
there 4, was 49, NO authority for 80 doing He ar
perfect law, as no change could be- made until
theeomm ners had decided upon some place
Is the future Gnpital, thus clearly; exercising
powers delegated t0 the governor and legisla-
live assembly; that the missionersw were APP
which was essential and absolutely requfsiteEt o
effect o change in thu seat of government 8 &c
Undoub tedly, hes ays, sstthis was comforting
upon these defendants powers which required
the exercise Of discretion Of Judgment, 81 Wis
dom, Of patriotism, and it was putting upon
them tho performance Of duties expressly en-.
joined upon the governor and legislatiy assem-.
bly,. s. .sss'ffzZ.
The chief justice then discusses fully the
question of delegated powers, after which <hs
fakes up various cases OF location or capitals q
states and territories, which he maintains ar.
not parallel to the case. From the Who'll.
case he concludes that said act of the terri
torial Legislature was unwarranted and invalid
and that the julg ment Of The district sconr
Should stnnd. There two papers were bot
ably prepared and bound To- attract vide 1t
tention The case seems to have TITO sides ant
each side has strong advocates. -
I.sss E 95}ast,si
xankton consrsgati College.