The record-union., 1893-03-15

4 =
adopted by the necessary vote and sent
to the Governor for his approval, and by
him approved and certified to the Secre-
tary of State. That is to say, when it
comes to changing the seat of Govern
ment the third and coordinate branch of
the legislative arm of the State, the Ex-
ecutive, must take part.
1t is contended that as Section l of
Article VIII. provides that ''any amend
menr' may be proposed, ETC., by such
procedure as was had in this case, there
fore, by and under that provision, the
twentieth article of the Constitution may
be amended; that if there is the requisite
vote thereon, that article, the twentieth,
is amended no matter what provisos and
conditions it a0aV contains. This is all
that the most ardent and talented Of the
removalists contend for their case, and
we have heard them state it-their entire
case is rested right there. SO far as the
Constitution is concerned.
Upon that issue the non-removalsts
can afford to meet them and confidently
count upon success. But if other ground
is needed for footing it is found broad
and strong in a positive and mandatory
constitutional direction in Article Xxx,
which we have italicised above, to wit:
regulations and provisions for the taking
of the vote on ratification Of the law sub
mitting the question of a change that
must be provided and put into the We
hicle of proposition" But such regula-
tons and provisions must be provided
by ts0O-thirdS Uote Of each house. No
such action has been taken.
1fit is replied that in 1883 the Legisla-
ture passed a general Act providing now
notice shall be given, and votes taken on
constitutional provisions, and submitted
propositions, we reply that the Act in
question, so far as it may be claimed to have
any relation to the case in hand, is functus
o6icio. The regulations and provisions
required in this case clearly, the consti-
tuition trainers intended should be spe-
citic and apply solely and only to the
matter of changing the seat of govern
ment, and for the very purpose of giving
greater permanency to the location of the
Capital, and that the question of change
should be submitted under special and
unusual conditions.
We do not see how it is possible to ig-
more the italicized portion of the article
we have quoted, and by a sweeping prop
osition under Article XVIII. destroy the
intended purpose. Such view renders
the words of the article absolutely life
less, construes them to be without mean
ing and to be mere surplusage upon the
tables of the law.
Section l OF Article XX. was placed
there for purpose. 1t is no more to be
ignored, set aside and violated than is
Section l of Article XVIII. Observance
~ ~ WIZ a. 0OGS bOI lLlIuOe upon or
violate Article XVIII, but procedure for
Capital removal cannot be had under Arti-
Gle XVIII. without violating the spirit of
the Constitution as expressed in Article
Xxx. The Constitution governs the Con-
stitution. A law for Capital removal must
be passed as are other laws, before any
lawful action is had in such matter. After
1t is passed, resolution of submission
TO amend the Constitution must be made
the vehicle for carrying the law to the peo-
pie for their ratification or rejection.
Upon these grounds the opponents of the
hasty action OF Saturday night may safely
rest.
There is one other question involved to
which there must be given attention
that Senator Hart did not as a matter of
fact vote for the resolution of removal,
and that without his vote there was no
two-thirds vote had in the Senate, since
it is true that vote announced with
condition attached, and under an an
purpose showing it to 5e op-
posed to its apparent expression, is not a
vote as on its face appears, but is a vote
as was by its authors intention declared.
The refusal OF the Senate to permit this
fact to enter into the record of the roll
call was remarkable and unprecedented
action, violative of the long established
usage of legislative bodies, on par with
pettifogging practice in a crossroads
Justices court, and may be inquired into
by courts to correct a record. If all the
points we have taken are overthrown,
the divisionists will enjoy the fruits of
victory, therefore, only upon the miser-
able ground of bubble and technical
ity and falsified record, and not by
reason of observance of the Constitution.
or by virtue of the observance of the laws
of deliberative bodies. That this refusal
to place Senator Hart right alone secured
San Jose its apparent advantage, the San
Jose Mercury of yesterday admits in SO
many words.
4 INDUSTRIOUS SHAME.
The San Jose lobby opened its cam
paign on the Capital question by assert
ing that it would resort to no yulgar