The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1892-12-18
Constitutionaliiy Of the Act of 1885 Not Passed
Upon. but By Inference 1t Is No Better
than the Others.
Newly Elected Legislature Is an Official
Body and Can Make Laws.
TALLY ConcurriBg 0pinions-What the
Democrats Will Do.


Court Declares Those of 1891 and 1870 In
vsiid-Legisiature All Right
Tbs eerrymandsrs are overthrown. The
decJsion of the Supreme Court in the case
was handed down at 2 o'clock yesterday
afternoon. IL was written by Judge COT.
fey. Judges Mcbride and Miller ooncurring,
while Judges Elliott and Olds filed sep
arate opinions, concurring for the most
part. but differing IL details. The decision
declares shc court has iurisd ction. pro-
nounces the acts of 1891 and 1879 u%nconsti-
~tutlonal. and holds the nswly-elected Leg
i~slature to be an off cial body de facto and
valid lawmakers. The decision Of the
lower court. which declared the acts of
1881 and 1886 unconstitutional, restoring
shat of 1879. 10 reversed.
The effect Of the opinion of the majority
of the court is TO decide that the courts
have authority to adjudge an apportion-
ment act void If it violates the provisions
OF the Constitution. The point made by
the counsel for the election officers and the
the State, that the conrts have no jurisdic-
ton Of the question. Is disposed of by this
conclusion. The decision, as held by q ma
Jointly Of the court. is also to the
effect that the court has . right
to decide as to the constitutionalIty
OF the acts of 1879 and 1891, but
that the question of the validity OF the
act Of 1855 does not appear In the case.
The decision Of the court Is that the acts
of 1891 and 1873 are unconstitutional, but
10 10 held that the members of the General
Assembly chosen at the recent election,
under the act of 1891, are officers de facto.
and their acts, 90 far ~ concerns the pub
lie. are valid. The Judgment of the lower
court is reversed for the reason that. the
act of 1879 being unconstitutional,
Powell, the ~relstor, had no right
in Q writ of mandamus to compel
its enforcement. Judge Elliott concurs
in the holding that the court has power,
at the suit of q party entitled to q decision
upon such q question. to give judgment
upon the constitutionslity of apportion.
ment laws. but he holds that the ~relator,
Powell. has no right to ask for q decision
upon the validity of the acts of 1885 and
1891 because he makes no case. for the res-
son that his COMPLAINT is founded upon q
law which he himself shows to be utter
IL void. It is further held by
Judge Elliott TO be q well-settled
principle of law that constitutional ques-
tons nno be decided unless such de-
cision IL absolutely necessary to q final
disposition of the case actually before tho
court. and his opinion shows that this case
is finally disposed of before the question Of
the constitutionality of the acts of 1891 and
1855 10 reached.
The effect Of the decision Of the majority
OF the court - to leave the State without
any law under the provisions of which IN
election of members of the Legislature
could be held, for the decision makes no
reference TO any act under which an elec-
tion may be conducted. But this effect of
the opinion of the majority is modified to q
degree by the holding hat there is q de
fscto Legislature, and that it can enact
laws and transact public business.