The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1893-03-01
IHE CONSTITUTION
(Continsled from page ~


cases within it's jurisdiction.
There are three departments Of gov
eminent, equal, coordinate and each su-
preme within its sphere; and one OF the
most elementary doctrines Of constitu-
tional law is, that to each Of these de-
partments is committed the decision OF
that which properly pertains to itself.
For the benefit Of gentlemen who have
not informed themselves upon these
fundamentals, / read from Cooley's Con-
stitutionsl Limitations marginal page
'39:
We have before seen that we are to
expect in every constitution an appor-
tiOnment OF the powers Of government.
We shall always find certain duties inn
posed upon the geveral departments 40
well as upon specified officers in each;
and we shall likewise discover that the
constitution has sought to hedge about
their action in several ways, with q view
to the protection of individual rights,
and the proper separation of duties; and
wherever any one is called upon to per-
form O constitutional duty, or to do any
act in respect to which 1t can be sup
posed that the constitution has
spoken, it is obvious that question Of
construction may at once arise upon
which some one must decide before the
duty is performed, or the act done. FROM
THE VERY NATURE OF THE CASE, THIS DE-
oIsIoN MUST COMMONLY BE MADE BY THE
PERSON, BODY OR DEPARTMENT UPON
WHOM THE DUTY is DEvoLVED, OR FROM
WHOM THE ACT is REQUIRED.
The question for our consideration is,
to whose jurisdiction is the decision Of
this great constitutional subject Of legis-
lstive organization been confded? We
unhesitatingly answer, to the political
department, because it is q question per-
tanning to that department and that
alons. in a legal sense. The phrase "iu-
diCial power, or power to hear and decide
does not define itself. There is no def
milton TO it, and none can be framed. We
must, as the cases arise, determine by
the application of fundamental principle,
and in the light Of historical instances,
and by analogous cases, whether they fall
within the judicial oognizance. In that
way we determine specific cases Of legis-
lstive power, and perhaps Of executive
power also. This court, in Leavenworth
county %. Miller, Z Kas., declared that
the power to enact laws authorizing the
issuance OF municipal bonds to aid in
the construction Of railroads, fell within
the grant Of legislative power, and the
process Of reasoning was this: Prior to
the adoption OF our constitution the
legislatures Of other states had been sc-
cugtomed to enact such laws. The
courts Of such states had upheld such
legislation as falling within like grants
Of power in their constitutions, or rs be-
ing a proper exercise OF Legislative dis
cretion. The trainers Of our organic law
knew Of such exercise Of legislative
power, therefore they must be presumed
to have intended to include it's exercise
in the grant expressed by them; and the
people. with presumptiVely like knowl-
edge, must have likewise intended.
This is the true rule, and by its aid we
determine whether jurisdiction in the
courts over given subject is included in
the grant Of Judicial power.
Have the courts hitherto arrogated to
themselves the power to determine the
legal organization or composition Of leg