Press and daily Dakotaian. (Yankton, Dakota Territory [S.D.]) 1880-1889, 1885-03-10

Governor Pierce and the Gaaai
- Rem0Ynl. 3AS

a.N
Removal. 4
In his .Ysnkton speech, delivered July
25th last, the then newly appointed
Gov. Pierce, made use of the following
language relative 10 the removal OF the
capital:
The duty Of the executive is not to
make the laws, but to execute them.
The only means he has of knowing the
will of the people is by looking at the
measures which they have enacted
through their representatives. If such
representatives have been false to their
constituents, the remedy lies in chang.
ing them and electing men more faithful
to their oaths and their duty. Now your
legislature has passed an act regarding
the seat of government. What it in.
tended to do, what it meant to accom-
plish by that act. is very plain. What
it actually did accomplish must be de.
termined by future developments.
This act repealed the Law making
Yankton the capital; it appointed COM
mission to fix upQ1EA permanent seat of
government, an1aRSt, it provided that
until A1oh location was made the terri
t0fial ar609tes sho11d remain at Yank.
ton, unless the governor should desig-
nate some 6her point by written order.
Whether this last provision was wise or
unwise is not tor me to say; but it is GER
tainly as much part of law az any other
section. The governor, in this discre-
ton has acted upon this clause, and it 10
very clear to me that the power having
been exercised the order has all the force
and effect of statute until repealed or
revoked. That the incoming governor
may again call the grant into play and
revoke or annul the order is probably
true. The question is, should this be
done? I am told that the capitol
building will be completed in a
few weeks and therefore the commits.
sioners are required to notify the COVER
nor, who in turn is required to issue q
proclamation and the Offices shall then
be renewed to such place. Now then
the order OF Gov. Ordway must be
observed by the incoming governor or il
must be revoked. It would be something
even more than disregard Of precedent
and courtesy to ignore this order
formally authorized as it was by the
Legislature. Now shall 1 revoke it:
Would such an act contribute to the
dignity and tranquility Of the territory
Would not proclamation revoking the
order appear frivolous in view oi
the fact that within fortnight the
governor may be called upon tc
issue q proclamation enforcing
Iit? am asking these questions no,
because have completely settled thu
matter in my own mind, for events may
occur to demand such revocation, but t
suggest some of the difficulties I hav,
encountered in considering this question
In few months the legislature will as
semble and the people will have an op
portunity to make their wishes know
IN this matter. Whatever action may b
taken now will be but temporary an,
epbemeral at best, and in view Of thi
fact, what may do seems of slight i'm
portsnce and trifing significance.
have not discussed the legal proceed
lngs which are pending because I mus
act solely on what find befor
me, upon the law as it stands UNT1
ALTERED By THE LEGISLATURE or th
courts. The legislature meant to tranl
fer the capital; of that there is n
question. Recognizing the fact that
is the duty OF the executive to carry on
the intent and meaning of the people
representatives as thoroughly and com
pletely as possible. I STILL WISH I
UNDERSTOOD THAT HAVE NO PLANS T
PUSH Oh THEORIES TO ADvANC
against my competent author
ity which may direct me to modify c
reverse my action. am the subject {
the law. Let the law and people wh
| make the law express clearly what the
require me to do and shall cheerful
Obey.