The record-union., 1893-03-16

l. That section begins thus: "The City
Of San Jose rs hereby declared to be the
seat of government, and shall SO TeD1di1,"
etc. That is the identical language of
Constitution, except that the name ",Sdc-
Tanle1etO" is used instead of "Sdn Jose"
Then there IS provlso, thus: "prOUIded,
that the State shall receive donation of
a site of not less than ten acres and one
million dollars, before such removal shall
be had. The Governor, Secretary of State
and the Attorney-General are hereby
authorized to approve said site, and upon
the approval thereof, and the payment of
one million dollars into the State Treas
ury the Legislature shall provide for the
erection of the necessary buildings and
the removal of the seat of government"
1t is my opinion that the whole thing is
void and of no force. The location of the
seat of government is a question of fact.
San Jose is not now and will not be the
seat of government of this State until the
official headquarters of the State are
legally and actually removed from Sacra-
mento to that place; and the declaration
that 'the city of San Jose is hereby de-
clared to be the seat of government"
amounts to nothing under any circum-
stances now existing, or that will exist
at the time the vote is actually taken.
| The proposed amendment does not pro-
vide for the removal. 1t says it is already
there; then follows the proviso that man
| take it there.
When the present Constitution was
| framed, Sacramento was in fact the seat
of government; no legislation was re-
| qulsite; 1t was fact, and the convention
gave expression to that fact and provided
means of removal. In the old Consti-
tuition we find the following: Article Il,
Section /. ''The first session Of the Leqis-
Jatare shall be held at the Pueblo de San
oh nm b,f ha !
| seat Of government, until removed 6y TAR"
| etc. AT that time there was nothing
permanent about the seat of government
and probable change was provided for;
| but when the new Constitution was
framed there was fixed location, yet the
means for removal were provided for.
Now suppose this resolution is adopted
| by the people and San Jose fails TO pay
| the money or donate the land. Of course
no change will be made; but the Consti-
tuition would say the seat of government
was at San Jose.s
Again, you will see at the conclusion of
the proposed amendment, it reads that
when the money and land are received,
| 1.-The Legislature shall pr0Uide for the
erection Of the accessory buildings and the
removal Of the seat Of gOUel7tnlent." Thus
| showing that something more is to be
done.
am inclined to believe that the Con-
| stitution can be amended and the seat of
government removed by an amendment
| to the Constitution without the enact
ment of a specific law, for the people can
do almost anything, but when a self
enforcing amendment to the Constitution
is sought to be created it must intelli-
gently set forth the object and the man
ner OF execution in the amendment. In
other words, to amend this particular
section without a law first submitted
would require as full provision as the
law contemplated should contain. 1t
does not take much of a constitutional
provision as basis for legislation, but it
requires legislative provisions in the
Constitution if it is to be self-enforcing,
To be self-enforcing it must be uncondi-
tionally explicit. 1t must be so framed
that If 1t receive the sanction of the voters
1t will under its own terms take effect
and carry with it full provision for the
execution OF its objects without leaving
anything to the possible acts of some
body over whom the Legislature could
not have any power, as in the case of the
condition as TO San Jose paying the mill
ion dollars and making the deeds, both
OF which conditions are wholly beyond
the control of the Legislature now or
hereafter. The self-enforcing quality does
not exist in the new proposition, and it
would be void for uncertainty il nothing
else. 1t is the province of the Constitu-
ton to secure certainty, and it would be
difficult 10 suggest anything that would
be more disastrous to the best interests of
the State than to have the location of the
seat of Government in doubt. In this in
stance the proposed amendment states
what is not SO, and does not state the
manner OF changing it, but does leave it all
to the future conduct of the Legislature,