The record-union., 1893-03-15
THE CAPITAL REMOVAL ACTION
INVALID.


AS we announced on the morning of
our first issue after the hasty and illegal
action of the Legislature in its attempt to
remove. the Capital to San Jose, we be-
Heve the action to be invalid and not
worth the paper upon which the tesolu-
ton was written. We do not wish to hold
out any delusive hopes to the people of
retention of the Capital at this place. We
do not deem the matter of such supreme
importance that Sacramento should retain
the Capital; the removal might prove a
blessing in disguise, though a temporary
injury.
But as proposition of law, we adhere
to the position taken by the RECoRD-
UNION on Monday morning, and insist
that it is 80 simple that Grammar School
boy can comprehend it, and realize its in
vulnerability. With perfect frankness
we admit that the chief trouble with it is
that there appears no speedy method by
which the question can be brought before
court. But the people of California do not
wish any end achieved except by the or
derly processes of the law. They will
not and cannot consider as merely tech
nical those things which are absolute
essentials to validity, since to concede
that any action not in strict conformity
with the Constitution shall be taken to be
valid, is to open the door to the very
worst and most dangerous character of
revolution, and to give to legislators
power that will be more than autocratic.
Now that the Legislature is dissolved
for the session, let the claims of invaIidIty
OF its action be clearly stated for the con-
sderation of the people of the State.
The points against the action of the
houses are but three IN number. At least
two of these are in our opinion invulner-
able, and we have such faith in them that
we hope to live sufficiently long to see
the Capital removed by such process as
has been provided in this case, confident
that if the wish is gratitied we will attain
unprecedented old age.
The Constitution is capable of amend
ment in two ways, and in but two-by
amendment proposed by the houses of
the Legislature, as provided in Section I,
Article XVIII, and adopted by the peo-
pie at time provided by the Legislature
for an election; or revision by conyen-
ton called as provided in Section of the
same article, the action of the convention
to be ratified by the people.
The proposition to amend may be made
by the concurrent action, by resolution,
of the two houses on two-thirds vote of
each house. In this case there is strong
reason for the contention that two
thirds vote of each house was not had in
adopting the Capital removal concurrent
resolution.
There is another proposition in the
Constitution TO be considered, however.
since it is an accepted maxim that the
Constitution governs the Constitution
and that is that the trainers of the instru-
ment purposely and wisely provided a
seat of government and amending the
Constitution to that end, from that pro-
vided in Article XYIII for other amend
ing.
This is found in Article Xxx. of the
Constitution, Section l. 1t is so brief
that we give it in full. "The city of Sac
rsmento is hereby declared to be the seat
OF Government of this State, and shall so
remain until changed by lar; but no lar
changing the seat of Government shall
be valid or binding unless the same be
approved and ratified by a majority of
the qualified electors of the State voting
therefor at q general State election, under
such regulations and provisions as the
Legislature, By a tleo-thirds uote of each
house. may provide, submitting the ques-
ton Of change to the people,"
This is all the law there is upon the
subject. Our contention is that in the
matter of relocating the seat of Govern
ment the Constitution provides distinct
and notably diffefent method of proceed
ure from the ordinary submission and
adoption of constitutional amendment
it is ''change" of the seat as well as
constitutional amendment. That this
is sustained by the fact, first, that a spe-
cific date is provided when a vote is to
be taken; that is, at "a general State cleo
ton" whereas other constitutional sub
mission may be had at special elections;
second, that the proposition to be sub
mitted must embrace and contain law.
submittiAg the question regarding
..change," to be ratified at the election or
refused ratification; third, that law is
not to be made by concurrent resolution,
but only as is provided by the Constitu-
ton, to-wit: by bill introduced, sent to
print, returned from print, regularly