Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1896-12-22

respect to them, they incur obligations,
esquire rights aud discourage duties ia
relisnce upon them. II ,uch law, 10
any inHtanCe, should urn out to be
void, because sOnie requirement OF tbs
Constitution had mt zen observed Ia
lie assage, great Injustice would bs
likely TO follow. We must regard the
enTolleu' nil Gully signed, approved,
and ocposllrd In the public archives,
aA a mtre acceptable anu convenient
source OF authorization, aud IL re.
,er!ed TO, lees liable to ovprtutn law,
and quite az liable as to the jpurnsls OF
the Two houaes. Tie people ought
10 be rtquIed 10 ransack tuch
journals TO hsotr,g'n whe.her laws
hnve bIeu duly passed, ana they can.
not I've eEepcted 70 10 50. MI ehcu d
lawyers be ore Gav sing clients, be re-.
quireu to search tuch journals. Sta,u.
tory enactmerlB should not depend
ana stand upon such u sandy anu I'm.
certain iounistlUn, II Il uetter one can
be found.
We are Of the opinion that the CO.
rollmeDt bill duly signed approved anu
deposited in the lillce OF the secretary
OF state Is quite Us reliable, and more
acceptable anu convenient than the
entries, or the absence Of entries pi
Legislative action which may be found
on the Journals 81 tho two hDuses. And
II relied upon unimpeachable will be
less liable to overlurn laws upon
which the people have relied, and
under which they have acquired
rite, incurred obligations, ana per.
formed cut!cG--less liable In that way
to cause litigation and confusion. The
question involves considerations OF
public policy.
In Latierly Va Huffman, "a late case
decided by the Kentucky Court OF
Appeals, the objection to the law vns,
That on the finai passage 10 the Ssr-
ate OF the bill as amended in the other
House, the vote WIS not taken by yeas
and Days.' Alter a Thorough examlpu-
ton OF the question similar to tue enc
now under consideration, ana the
court eaiu.
"Fr0m every point of reason, there.
fore, we are convinced that the enrolled
bill, when attested by the prehiilng
officers az the law eqnires, must TIC
accepted by the courts as the very bill
adopted by the legislature. and that it's
ni0de OF enactment was III conformity
to all cont titutiouai requirements.
When 30 authenticated, IL imports alb.
solute verify, aul 10 unimpeAched by
the Journals. When we look To the
authorities We iinJ, as indicated be-
lore, great diversity OF opinion.
They are too nuDeIous to be reviewed
here. We notice, however, that the
more recent cases are adopting the
English role, ana holding the enrolled
bill conclusive. In several Of the CAGES
whore the courts ielt constrained 20
follow tbsir former rulings holding the
journals competent, regret Is expressed
mat q different rule had not prevailed.
Two Lawyers Reports Annotated,
page 2O3.
State Of Nevada VS. swift, 10
nevada, 17G.
PangbJrn va Young, 81 n. Y, 20.
Sherman We Story, 30 Cal, 25S.
In Field vs CLARK, l4s U. 5, Gay, the
court alter stating That IL was not
necessary to decide in that case 10
what extent the validity OF legislative
acts may be Affected by the failure to
enter on tue journals matters which
the constitution expressly requires 10
be entered, used the following Ian.
gusge:
"The signing by the Speaker of the
President OF the Senate, in open ses.
zion, or an enrolled bill is an official
attestatlon by the two houses OF such
bill as one that passed Congress II is
declaration 10y the two houses,
through their presiding officers, 10
the President, that bill, thus attest
ed, has received, in due form, tue
sanction Of the legislative branch OF
the government. and that ii is de.
livered to him in obedience TO the
constitutional requirement tnst all
bills which psss Congress shall be
presented to him. And when bill,
thus uttested, receives hie sppro val,
and is deposited in the public archives,
its naturalization as a bill that has
passed Congress should be doomed
complete and unimpeRchable."
Harwood Wentworth, 1872 U. S.
5A7,
The constitutions of many of the
states expressly require the yeas and
nays on the passage OF bill as well ae
other matters to be entered on the
journals; while the constitutions of
other states do not expressly require
such entries. The decisions holding
that the court may look beyond the
enrolled bill In the public archives,
uuly signed and approved. In nearly
every instance were made in states
whose constitutions expressly required
snch entries upon the journals, while
the decisions with some exceptions
holding the law, duly signed and ap-
proved, in the public archives as un-
impe enable, were made under consii.
tutious mt requiring such entries.
There are, however, well considered
cases that h Did such laws so deposited,
signed anu approved, as conclusively
authenticated, though constitutional
provisions expressly require such
entries 10 be made on the journals.
1t Is not necessary for us to go that
far in this cas- Q, az our constitution does
not expressly Tebuire such entries to
be maze, except when demanded
by five members, and that
entry we have seen IL mainly
for the purpose of publication.
English etatutes found in the proper
custody, duly iAu,heutica g., import
absolute verify; auch has been the
common law OF England from early
times.
The statutes Ia question having
been duly signed, approved and depop
----.-----------------=