The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1892-03-03
Should Be selected. It was assumed

the people themselves should select
those to whom they proposed to en-
trust the administration of such i'm
portant functions. And yet, when
the legislature met and proceeded TO
carry out the will of the people in
framing law which should protect
them from railroad injustice, and at
the same time protect the railroads
from injustice at their hands, which
was the public desire, it was ascer-
tanned that the executive whom the
people themselves had selected, had
determined in his own mind that
HE SHOULD BE VESTED
with the power Of naming these com.
missioners and of substantially di-
recting their action, for such is the
condition of the law today. 1t was
urged upon the floor of the two houses
by Democrats of unquestioned prin-
ciple and of thorough devotion to
Democratic teachings that it was Pc
culiarly appropriate and fit that
these commissioners, vested as they
were necessarily under the terms
trary and absolute power over
great investments, should receive
their commissions from the people
themselves and be responsible only to
the people for their discharge of what
ought to have been sacred trust. But
their arguments were met with the
ipse diXit of those who stood near the
governor that he would not tolerate
this Democratic method of govern
ment, and if bill was passed giving
to the people their inalienable right
to select their own agents Tor the adj
ministration Of their government, his
eXcellency would veto the bill. This
had its effect, of course, and after u
struggle for the supremacy Of Demo-
cratic principles, the advocates of
those principles yielded their judy
ment and surrendered to the eXecu-
tive right which belonged to the
people. The significance of the move
ment was not detected by the masses.
Il was not seen by them that this was
u long step in the direction of absolu-
teism in our state. They did not know
nor realize that this meant the gov
ernor should be supreme in the admin
istration of the commission law and
that his word or his nod should pre-
vail thereafter in the operation of this
board. / do not charge that the gov
ernor has interfered with the admin
istration of the law by the commits
sion. Possibly he has not, and for
the sake of argument 1 am willing to
admit that he has not uttered one
word or promulgated one suggestion
to the commission since he approved
the bill. But that is not the ques-
| ton. The question is one of power in
| the executive, of violation of Demo
cratic principles, of investing one man
by law with autocracy, which is in
consistent in any shape with genuine
republican liberty. The motive was
artfully concealed in this, as it was
concealed in the attempt to deprive
the railroads of their power to go tC
the courts for relief. There was M
mention made in the law that the
governor should have power to re-
move the commissioners, and it was
even urged that this power not having
been granted to the governor, was in
capable of exercise by him. This spe
ciOus plea could not impose upon an.
one familiar with the laws of thi;
State, for, turning to the Revised Stat
utes, there stands a law which au
thorizes the governor to remove an.
appointive officer in the administra
ton at his own will. refer to articl
1887 of the Revised Statutes. And so
when the work was done and finished
we found this great investment in tn
state manacled SO as to prevent then
from going to the courts and praying
as an humble suppliant for justice
and the administration of it's affair
placed entirely in the hands of three
men who were selected under the Law
because they had no interest whateve
in the investment and liable to re
moval at any time at the will of tn
governor who appointed them, with
out check or hindrance. If this is no
absoluteism, what would you call ii
fellow citizens? If this is not q ste
in advance of anything undertaken b,
Edmond j. Davis in his career in thi
State from 1870 to 1874 what woul
you call it? If this style of law max
ing is net absolutely inconsistent al,
incompatible with liberty and wit
democracy, then, after long years c
faithful and patient study, | hav
failed to grasp the meaning of eithe
term. How monstrous thepropositio
that the
PEOPLE ARE NOT CAPABLE