Mineral Point tribune. (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1869-1938, 1892-02-13

iel stature to apportion and re-district the
members thereof is not an absolute,
arbitrary and unconditional power, but Is
subject TO certain well defined express
limitations. The limitations (same as at
the beginning Of this artice) we're
quoted, and it was maintained that
the pupose Of these Limitations was and
is to secure fair and equitable appor-
tionment of the members Of the legisls-
ture among he people of the state, by
grouping them into districts composed Of
convenient and contiguous territory
having equal population, and a com
munity of local interests.
The purpose Of these hmi tations is un-
mistakable. They are expressed in apt
and appropriate language. Every mem
Der of this court, every lawyer of this bar,
and every citizen Of this state capable
of compression. of that language.
appreciates full well their purpose as here
expressed. And yet when the people ap-
peal to this court for protection in this
very particular they are met with the con-
tention that it is powerless to act-that 1t
cannot con6ne the legislature within the
Limitations of the constitution, because,
ana solely because, the power exercised
by the legislature is claimed to be purely
Legislative or political power And the
question confronts US. is this strange con-
teution correct2 We submit it cannot
be.
Mere statement of the question shows it
to be judicial, not political. In its broad
est sense it Is, has this court rightfuI au-
thority to determine whether the leglsIa
ture has exceeded the limits expressly
imposed by the constitution upon the
exercise of its powers? As we have al
ready shown well defined limitations are
imposed by the constitution upon that
power. They were imposed solely for the
purpose of confirming the legis ature with
in them Whether, in a given case it has
acted within them is purely
judicial question for the courts
to determine and not the Legislature. So
completely is this a Judicial question that
courts are justified in interfering only to
determine whether the Legislature has
acted within its constitutional limits, or
as said by Judge Cooley, in his Constitu-
tional Limitations, page 100;
ut is only where they (the COURTS find
that the legislature mas failed to keep
within its constitutional limits, that they
are at liberty to disregard its acton; and
it doing so, they only do what every pri-
vate citizen may do in respect to mandates
of the courts, when the judges assume to
act and to render judgments or DEGREES
without jurisdiction,
Continuing, Col. Bird said that if the
constitution entrusted to The legislature
the general, unrestricted power TO appor.
ton, if it had stopped with the language
1.-THE legislature shall apportion and dis.
trict anew the members Of the senate and
assembly, it might, with more force,
perhaps, be contended that the power was
a purely political one, con6ded exclusively
to the discretion Of the Legislature. But
when the constitution restricts the power,
it is not matter of discretion with the
legislature whether it will act within the
restrictions or not. So long as it does act
within them, it may beexarcisinga purely
political and discretionary power, and the
courts may not control its action within
those limits But at once it oversteps
those bounds, it has not only no discretion
to exercise, but no power to net at ALL
And the courts, in voiding its act, do not
interfere with its right to exercise It's dis
cretion or political power wner3 it has the
right to exercise either or both, bat deter
mine only that it hal passed the limits
where il was entitled to exercise either.
Sa.h determination involves only
question of law, aud the exsr-
else of strictly judicial power
The power 70 form cities towns and
counties, and to Ok ana alter their bouu-
daries, Is essentially legislative aud po-
litioal power. Tae cour cannot exercise
it, neither eau they be au ioriz'd by the
Legislature to exercise it. But when ex.
exercised by the legislature the court may
determine whether it has exceeded it
powers.
Col Bird cited an important decision
where it was urged in argu ment there as
it is also here thaF tine qle-ton of ca+s.i.
cation was a legistaty and p2Iucd. not
a Judicial question, and iss exercise con-
djed solely to tine discretion Of the
legislature, AM so1ld not therefore De
controlled by The court, That argument
is ans werej there uy tine court, rs it well
may be here, m tie following appropriate
language:
lit has also been suggested thgt the
question Of necessit, for classification and
the extent thereof as well as eft what are
local ar rDayial laws rs d legislative and