Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1886-08-03
IS IT NOT REVOLUTIONARY


ing Government. One is by the violent
assault of arms as the result of long en-
dured wrongs or the long entertainment by
the people of the desire for a change in
methods of government, that finally ripens
into revolution and takes the form of force
in order to substitute the new for the old
The other method is by peaceful agree
ment, according to democratic methods,
to reform the organic act or compact UNI
der which individual rights are surren-
dered and community authority vested in
agencies selected to administer govern
mental affairs.
Now the proposition to COW, coerce and
render subservient to a faction the judicial
arm of the Government, while it is under
taken under the seeming sanction Of law,
is nevertheless such an abuse of power,
that it is precisely as revolutionary as if
actual force were employed to pull the
Judges from the bench and put np the
tools of the faction.
The question before this people now is
whether they will sit quietly by and wit
ness the contamination Of this outrage
They have but one means of preventing it,
and that is by the entry of such protest
that their servants, the Legislators, who are
in place to do the will of the people, may
be instructed as to that judgment While
we have confidence in a majority of the
membership of the law-making bodies, yet
there should be holding up OF the hands
OF every man of them who resists the revo-
lutionary plot. Already the press is voic-
ing the protests of the people, and We an
ticipate still more vigorous and pronounced
remonstrance.
The truth IS chat beaten back by the an
ger of the people, the conspirators who pro-
pose to PROSTATE the judiciary at the feet
of political knavery, have, by flank
movement, and under apparent cover of
constitutional law, undertaken to undo the
Supreme Bench for an Interior purpose, by
removal of two of the Justices on the plea
of physical incapacity. This can be done
only by legislative act, and raises the very
serious question that it is not within the
province Of the Legislature under call
that does not specify that as one Of. the
purposes of the session.
The constitutional provision declares it
may be done by concurrent resolution.
But it is warmly and honestly held that a
concurrent resolution that goes beyond the
expression of sentiment, or does more
than voice petition or a protest. that
undertakes to do definite thing, and
that thing the reforming of an indepen-
dent branch of the Government which is
chosen by the people and not by the
Legislature, is legislation. or course it
is not bill, does not require its separate
readings, nor does it need executive con-
firmation. But it is an extraordinary CON
cuTence, two-thirds vote being required
an unusual demand it affects the methods
Of government; it legislates out of office
men chosen by the people at the ballot
box; it tries judges and executes; it
touches one OF the foundation stones of
the governmental suPerstructure, and there
fore matter full OF grave doubt if it is not
legislation, and legislative action that differs
only in character from that other action
which We call law-making. In short. it is
a serious issue Il it is not an attempt to
play new game to be known as Court
making, or legislation by indirecliou,
differing essentially from that other act
SSenator-making. This latter is COM
manded by Federal statute, and the Legis-
lature is but part of the machinery of
choosing a Federal officer, for a United
States Senator is Federal official But
in the other case it is contended, and
with force, that the authority to act is
derived from the State Constitution, re-
lates to State government, affects the rela-
ton between the three independent arms
of the sovereign State, and is legislation
prescribed by the organic law and requir-
ing vote that would override veto.
lfthen, the Houses proceed tn do thing
at a session under a call in which it is not
specified as one of the matters to be legis-
lated upon, it raises the question If they
do not seize authority, and do revolu
tionary act.
Let us suppose the thing done, and the
matter to come, as it will, before the Su-
preme Court, and that body to hold, as
there is reason to believe it must under
the law, that the act OF removal was lille
gal; will we not have made progress to-
ward Mexicanizing the State Government?
In short is there any future to the pro-
posed action under present circumstances
that is not full of trouble and contention
and i'll?
Po02 PolICY.
The friends of irrigation are in danger