The record-union., 1893-05-29
CAPITAL REMOVAL CASES.
Livermore Wants His Case First Heard
On Its Merits.
His Counsel Petition the Supreme Court
to That Efect-No Action Yet
Taken Bv the Court.

On Saturday last L. T. Hatfield ap-
peared before the Supreme Court in San
Francisco and filed petition therein
prepared by himself and Grove L. john
son, counsel for II. p. Livermore in the
latter's injunction suit against Secretary
OF State Waite the Capital removal case,
In which the court is asked to defer action
in the Rideout case until the other can be
heard in the Superior Court on its
merits and goes up on appeal.
The petition, which was presented on
Saturday, is asked for on the ground
that the Livermore suit was commenced
by taxpayer in good faith and is being
pushed with all possible diligence, the
Attorney General representing the inter
ests of the State, and trial of the case hav-
ing been set, at his request, for the 9th OF
June. The injunction granted IN the
1Ivermore case is good until the trial and
DECISION of the case.
The petition further states that on the
18th day of May, after the adjournment
of the court in which it had been agreed
that the Livermore case should be tried
On the 9th of June, there was filed with
the Clerk of the Superior Court of Sacra-
mento County the complaint in the case
of n. d. Rideout VS.. Waite, Secretary OF
State.
While such complaint prays for an in
junction 10 restrain the Secretary of State
from certifying the Constitutional Amend
ment, No. %, on Capital removal to the
County Clerks OF the respective counties,
Tor the purpose of su admitting the same 10
a popular vote, no bond for an injunc-
ton was rendered, nor was any restrain
ing order asked for or issued, nor was the
complaint verified by any one, nor was
there at any time any affidavit of merit.
That, although the name Of the State IS
used in the case, there is no evidence or
allegation that there was authority for so
doing, but that RideOut bases his right to
sue on the fact that he is a taxpayer and
citizen.
1t is further claimed by the petitioners
that in the Rideout case it is conceded
that the Senate Constitutional Amend
ment, No. %, was regularly and properly
adopted by the Legislature, and thereby
there is presented to the court state of
facts not supported in any-wise by the
records of the Legislature or otherwise;
that in the opinion of petitioners there is
no real controversy in said Rldeout act
ION, but that it Is intended to procure a
decision from the Supreme Court upon an
immaterial issue regarding the legality OF
the said amendment without all the facts
concerning the same being brought to
the attention Of the Court, and that the
suits wholly without merit, that no evil
dence was adduced at the pretended hear
ing of such cause, and that by reason OF
the agreed statement of facts, the Su-
preme Court is limited in its eXamina-
lions to line of consideration that eX-
cIudes the real merits of the case, and
that no injunction can issue without Yeri-
Tying the complaint or filing an atfi-
davit. Ii the Supreme should reverse the
judgment of the lower court in this case,
the judgment could not be enforced.
The alleged regularity and effectiveness
of the proceedings in the Livermore case
are explained at length, and claim made
that any decision in the RideOut case
could not affect the Livermore case,
since in the former case the facts are as
sumed and not proven; and as the actions
involve the highest questions that can be
considered by court-the constitution
ality of the Constitution itself and the
court would undoubtedly wish to have
all tho facts before it, the poStponement
of consideration of the Rideout case is
asked until the Livermore suit can come
properly before the court.
NO ACTION YET TAKEN.
By some misunderstanding the state
ment was enormously published on
Saturday evening that the court had
promptly granted the prayer of the petit
toner. Mr.. Hatfield returned from San
Francisco yesterday, and being called on
by RECORD UNION reporter, said:
1.-The situation was misunderstood, no
doubt by reason of the brevity of my
message received here. The Supreme
Court did not take any action whatever
in the matter. l applied to Chief Justice
Beatty for leave to place on file the petit
ton for postponement in the Rideout
case, and Judge Beatty permitted me to
do so. Grove l.. Johnson and myself had
prepared the petition, and had arranged
for serving copies on counsel for plaintiff
and defendant in the Rideout case. if per-
mission was given or any order made.
Il wired here TO serve copies, and the
reporters must have misunderstood Mr.
johnson as to there being any order
made. But in discussing the situation as
TO the object and intention of the petition
the understanding was had that an order
was actually made"