Abilene weekly reflector. [volume] (Abilene, Kan.) 1888-1935, 1893-03-02
POPULISTS LOSE.
Decision of the K nsas Supreme
Court
D.UCLASS RECOCylz ID As SPEAKER.
Dunsmore Has No stand z In Law-so
Says justices Horton aud Johnson,
Repubitca s-Alle POpu-
list, Dis-euts.

Johnson concurrinR and Justice Allen,
populist, dissenting, sustained the
Douglass or pub lean house as the
legal and constitutional house Of repre-
sentatives Of the Kansas Legislature,
and incidentally declared that the acts
Of the Dunsmore or populist house had
no standing in law. The opinion Of
the chief justice occupied an hour and
forty minutes in delivery and fully ex.
hausted the subject
The chief justice began by saying
that the court was under great obiva-
ton to the attorneys for the masterly
manner in which the case had been
presented Yesterday the court had
consumed the entire day in comparing
opinions, and examining authorities
This morning" he continued, II am
here to present my own views and, Mt
the co clusion, / will state some other
matters as TO the views Of other mem
bets of the court. No written OPP MON
mas yet been prepared" lie then went
briefly into the history Of the case and
declared that upon the allegations
made, the court had matter before IL
10 decide judicially.
The question at issue, the chief JUS
tice continued. was whether the Doug
lass house of representatives had legal
authority to arrest Gum. II there was
one house only the duty OF the court
would be easy AID plain, but 1t APP
peared from the respective journals
that there were two houses claiming
the right TO legis ate He then went
briefly into the way legislative bodies
are organized and cited McCray on
election to show that the proper per-
sons TO organize house were those
holding certificates, and, In support of
McCray, read passages from Cushing's
manual The supreme court OF Me-
braSka- no longer ago than January II
of tfis year, had taken that view Of the
question. In support OF this theory, he
declared, the scenes lately witnessed in
the Kansas capital fully J slified such
n rule. In the main, he said, II was
undertaken to ignore the statute in
making returns OF the election Of a
legislature and riot and violence re-
suited
In the case now before the court, the
chief justice continued, no showing had
been attempted that there was fraud
or bad faith on the part OF the state
board of canvass RS There had been
presented a revised journal" Of the
Dunsmore house, evidently carefully
prepared. and yet that JOURNAL day
after day seemed to recogniZ, that only
members holding GER iAcateS had au-
thority TO act For several days II set
forth that fifty-eight members respond
ed to roll call and others were coun Ell
in as present hut not voting in order To
make a quorum. the other members of
the house character zed as contestants.
This record was kept up until the coi-
testants were formally taken in by a
vote of the house Then the journal
showed that the Dunsmorc house nc.
cepted the presidents laid down in the
books rs correct.
Much was said about the Reed house,
the court went on, in support of the
practice OF counting in members, but
the Reed house had one of is own rules
formally adopted upon which to base
the speakers ruling The Dunsmort
house had adopted no such rule. More
than five persons who were counted in
by the Dunsmorc house had never rec
ognized IL as such, but were carrying
on house of their own. Speaker r. ed
never counted in any persons who had
not recognized him as speaker. Now
there could be no question that the
Douglass house was organized by the
votes OF sixty-four members who held
certificates
IL was claimed, the justice went on,
that there were some irregularities In
the organization OF the Douglass house
because II did not receive the roll Of
membership from the secretary of state
but 1t had duplicate of that roll The
secretary OF states failure TO lay befort
the house a roll could not prevent al
organization.
It was urged, Mr. Horton declared
that the court could not Interfere IL
the controversy between the riva
bodies, but the supreme court could moi
pass by n question because IL was ar
unpleasant one. 1t had no NOR,
right TO decline the exercise o.
jurisdiction than TO assume
jurisdiction that was not given u
It. 1t was claimed that the Douglass
house was destroyed when the senat,
and governor recognized the Dunsmor'
house. II that was the law the gov
ernor and senate two years ago nigh
have destroyed the populst house anC
created a republican house. And two
years hence. and so on through future
history. Other legislative bodies migh
be overturned TO accomplish partisan
ends II the Douglass house had vol
UNFAIRLY dissolved when the governo
and senate recognized the rival body
the question OF de facto government
would have been a strong force 10 tn
case, but II did not dissolve and II wa
still in existence.
In the course Of his remarks the chic
justice incidentally Endorsed the opin
ion OF Judge Hazen In the injunction
case against State Treasurer Biddle.
In conclusion, the chief justice SAT-
the Douglass house was the Lawful
house OF representatives and In hi
views on the subject he announced tina
Mr. Justice Johnston fully coincide'
and concurred.
Mr. Justice Allen then delivered I
dissenting opinion in which he he'll
that the supreme court had no jurisdic
ton OF the case a d as the Dunsmor
house had been recognized by the GOV
ernor and senate II was a de facto OF
ganization and It's acts were good 4
law.
PlA hog ~ burned.
CHATTANOOGA, Tenn, Feb. 2T.-Th
destruct On of the planning mill Of I'll
Commercial Lumber Co, at FELTON,, Ga
yesterday morning, entailing the los