St. Paul daily globe., 1894-06-19
DEFINING JUDICIAL POWERS.

The decision OF the ILLINOIS Suprem6
court sustaining the legislative and con-
gresSional appointments made by the
last legislature is in line with the decls-
ion of the like tribunal in New York.
There is an Importance attaching to it.
however. that will not be overlooked by
the legislatures of other states. as it
deals with one of the vital principles OF
our government, state and national.
The petition of the Republicans, ask.
ing that the law in controversy be de-
clared unconstitutional. was refused on
the ground of want of jurisdiction. The
court held that the apportionment was
made by the legislature in pursuance OF
the powers vested in it by the constltu-
ton; and having been so made, no other
branch of the government had a right
to interfere or to attempt to subvert its
purpose. The law itself was not passed
upon, except in SO far as inquiry was
made as to whether or not 1t complied
with the constitutional requirements.
These provide that these districts shall
be constituted of adjoining and con-
tiguous territory, as nearly equal In
population as practicable without a
division of counties or wards.
The decision is far-reachIng, and will
have tendency to represS the growing
disposition in the Republican party 10
usurp for the judicial branch of the gov
ernment powers that do not belong to
it, and that, once exercised, would tend
to subvert. if not to destroy. the func-
tions of legislation. The contention of
the Democracy ever has been that the
branches of government-legis
executive and judicial-were co-ordi-
nate, not antagonlstic. All are subjec
to the same reStraint-the organic law
and neither can violate this restraint
without doing violence to the constitu-
tion. The legislature enacts the laws,
the governor approves them, and the
courts pass upon their conformity with
the constitution. Neither the governor
nor the courts can make or amend laws,
nor can they refuse to enforce them ex-
cept they can be shown to be i'll trans
gressIon of the constitution. The mat
ter of apportionment is purely legis-
lative function. over which the judicia ry
has no control, even in revision, unless
it can be shown that the constitution
has been violated.
The line drawn by the Illinois court
should never De effaced. 1t is one that
marks the boundaries between cOnsti-
tutional law and the judicial despotis IN
that the Republican party has long
sought to establish; and, coming from a
tribunal the majority of whose men,
bers are Republicans, it is the more
significant. Certain matters are left
both by law and usage to the discre-
ton of each branch of the government.
1t is at perfect liberty to exercise this
discretion to it's full extent, and,
having done so. its acts are not legiti-
mately subject to revision. Political
appointments are among these things.
In the nature Of things, the rules gov
erning those making the apportionments
must be flexible. 1t is natural. too, that
| the party i'll power should seek every
| advantage that can be legitimately Oh
tanned by their means. They will group
Republican or Democratic counties to-
| gether, and create as many doubtful
! districts as possible, taking care mean
while to retain an advantage in all. The
Republicans have pursued this course
during the past thirty years, and no one
| has questioned their right to do so. The
| Democrats, however. i'll following their
| example. have been denounced from
one end of the land to the other: and in
Wisconsin, New York, Indiana. Michi-
| gan and Illinois the courts have been
| appealed to for redress. But in all in
stances, except IN Wisconsin. the right
of the legislature to apporton the state
as it saw fit has been maintained, and
the Judiciary has proved itself superior
to partisan influences.
| There is much meaning IN the de.
cision of no jurisdiction by the Illinois
court for which the country is to be
congratulated. In the present instance
it is the Republican OK that is gored.
The Democratic bovine may be the next
| victim.