The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1895-03-26
HE is INCONSISTENT
CLAUDE MATTHEwS.S ATTEsTATION
OF GOV. HOyEY,s PROCLAMATION.
Yet He Insists that Secretary owen
Shall Not Follow This
Precedent.

When Governor Matthews, as Secretary
of State, was called upon to attest the sig
nature of Governor Hovey to a proclama-
ton OF the laws passed by the preceding
Legislature, that of 1891, he used his au-
thority to exempt from operation. as he
thought, a certain part Of the proclama-
ton. 1t related to the infamous gerryman-
der of that year, which was afterward de-
ciared unconstitutional on broad lines by
the Supreme Court. The Democratic ma
jority in the Legislature had omitted one
county in the apportionment and Secretary
of State Matthews, in having the bill
printed, inserted the missing county in the
district in which it was intended to be,
thereby becoming a lawmaker without au-
thority of the Constitution. Governor Hovey
refused to promulgate this act with the
legally enacted statutes, and excepted it in
his proclamation. When it came to attest
ing the Governors signature to this procla-
nation, the astute partisan Secretary of
State added the following to the attestation:
by the Governor: In so far as the above
proclamation relates to the legal distribu-
ton of the acts of the Fifty-seventh Gem
eral Assembly to the several counties in
the State and announcing the date at which
said proclamation, [ do hereby attest the
signature of the Governor and affix the seal
of the State of Indiana hereto for the pur-
pose of giving force and effect to the acts
of the General Assembly of 1891, this being
all that is required in such certificate or
enjoined by law upon the Governor"
This was signed by Claude Matthews, as
Secretary of State, June 10, 1891.
The tables are now changed. The then
Secretary of State is now Governor. and
wants certain acts withheld from publica-
ton as laws. The custodian bill, according
to his claim, was vetoed, and should not
appear among the acts of the recent Legis-
lature. He would not be justified in with
holding from publication the acts concern
ing which there is no dispute in order to
defeat this law, and he will probably, there
fore, exempt the custodian act when he
comes to proclaim the statutes as in force.
Mr.. Secretary of State Owen has his at
testation ready. It reads as follows:
by the Governor: In so far as the above
proclamation relates to the legal distribu-
ton of the acts of the Fifty-ninth General
Assembly to the several counties of the
State, and announcing the date at which
the latest fling took place as stated In said
proclamation, / do hereby attest the sigma
ture of the Governor and fix the seal of the
State of Indiana, for the purpose of giving
force and effect to the acts Of the General
Assembly of 1895, this being all that is re-
quired in such certificate, or enjoined by
law upon the Governor.
civilian ID. OWEN,
Secretary OF State"
The Governor claims that Secretary Owen
showed a discourtesy in refusing to attest
the Governors appointment of prison di-
~rectcrs, appointments that are no longer in
his power by virtue of the new law. Yet
the refusal of Secretary of State Matthews
to attest a part Of Governor Hovey's proc
lamation shows how inconsistent Mr.. Mat
thews really is.