The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1888-12-11
Opinions of Prominent Law
yers ON the Ogden Test.
MIR. DOOLYHAS NOTHING TO SAY
Governor West Takes Hopeful View
"A Variety of Legal Light
~. The Decision

relating to the division of cities into
corporations of tie first second and
third degree.
The important questions involved as
explained in THE SUNDAY HERALD
aroused much interest, especially
among those directly concerned in the
issue. A HERALD man who was in Og-
den yesterday found that there was any
amount of excitement in that city, and
the outcome of the Hays case is awaited
with the utmost anxiety. The main
point, of course, Is on the validity of
the law, and upon this the failure or
success of all the dependent issues hang.
SOME DISCUSSION.
With view to seeing which way the
discussion tended, HERALD reporter
called upon a number of prominent
lawyers yesterday and the result was as
seen below:
COLONEL GODFREY of the Utah Com.
mission said that that BODY did NOT
expect to have to pass upon the law
1t is now before the court at OGDEN and
ne thought the decision of Judge
Henderson would do away with the
necessity of the commissions taking
any step in the matter.
GOVERNOR West was next seen, He
did not care to express his views on the
validity of the law, although he had a
very decided opinion on the subject. 1t
would be decided by the Court ard be
was willing to abide by that decision.
He said the principle involved it right
it is the principle of local representa-
ton, and if the present lew is killed it
can be replaced by one that will stand
the test of law. He thought the bonds
issued by this city under the act were
perfectly safe The parties who
subscribed for them were able to
hold them and The city would surely
stand good for the amount until it was
given the authority intended to be con.
Veyed to it by this act. The Governor
regretted that the validity of the law
had been questioned as it would lead to
complications, though he did not think
that any results that might come from
the defeat of the law would prove incur
abb.
P. L. WILLIAMS had not looked into
the matter and did not care to express
an opinion on it.
BEN SHEEKS did not think that the
absence of an enacting clause would
vitiate the law, as long as there is no
rule requiring such clause.
| JUDGE Hardness had given the matter
no attention and was therefore UMPIRE
pared to say anything in regard to Ii.
| JUDGE SUTHERLAND said that Cushing.
| in his work on parliamentary law
/ hnIdQ that thu GjOn IF ho
clause Vitiates law, and the only case
he knew of that was in accord with
this opinion was a Washington Terri
tory case. The case mentioned, bv
the way, in the discussion before the
| Utah Commission, on SATURDAY. In
certain States an enacting clause is pro-
vided for by the constitution, although
even in such States it has been held
that the absence of the enacting clause
did not inValidate the law. The Judges
private opinion was that the law in
question was valid. There is no statute
in Utah requiring an enacting clause.
and he thought 1t was, therefore, not
necessary to the validity of the law.
ARTHUR BROWN had not examined the
law in question; and, as he had never
had occasion to look the matter up. he
did not care to express an opinion
on the general proposition as to
whether or not an enacting clause was
necessary to the validity of law.
j. l.. RAwLINs thought that if the en-
| crossed copy of the law had been
certified and fled with the Secretary of
the Territory there was no question as
to its validity. There was no rule here
requiring an enacting clause and he.
therefore, did not think it necessary,
JUDGE MCBRIDE said he had come
across but one case in which the oues-
ton was raised. This was the Wash
ington Territory case, in which it was
held that the absence of the enacting
clause vitiated the law. L believe that
the opinion rendered in this case was
right.
THOMAS MARSHALL, who was on the
committee that had charge of the bill
in the Legislature, had no opinion to
make public on the subject.
JUDGE RosBoRoUGH was next seen,
He said that there was a general I'M
Outstanding in Legislative circles that
when the enacting clause is struck
from bill the measure is decapitated
and killed. The Judge said he thought
an enactlng cause was very neoes-
sary feature of a law. 1t was the
CiduSo, DC IL CudCLcu ny Iu6 dOY6r0Cr
and Legislative Assembly of the
Territory of Utah." that in
dicated that what followed was
the supreme will of the Legis-
lature. Without that, there was
nothing to say what the law was,
When asked if the signature of the
Governor and the chief officers of borh
houses of the Legislature would not 9
sufficient to fix the nature of the act,
the Judge said that there was nothirg
in these to show that the measure
was anything more than an express
sion of the will of these three parties.
Mr.. Rosborough laughed at the idea
that the publication of the law among
the Compiled Laws of Utah identified
it as a measure enacted by the Leeis-
lRture. He was of the opinion that
the absence of the enactipg clause was
a fatal defect,
JUDGE POWERS was confident that the
law would be declared invalid.
JUDGE MCKAY had given the matter
no attention He asked, however, If
there had been any suggestion that
there had been trickery in putting the
act through without an enacting clause.
chic WOO -