The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1896-12-12

] ritQr1ai legislature OF New -1eAlLO Ne.S
/ noL passed according TO law, altnouSn
| properly attested. IN this case the court
| again reaffirned the doctrine of Field vs.
! C.arl, and held that the law being at
! tested by the presiding officer OF Two
I houses of the territorial legislature, as
/ rCcuired by law, and signed by the gov
ernor and lodged with the secretary OF
state was un.mpeachable
/ Coming down TO the last case in lb-
( L. s. an effort was there made to snow
that act of the territorial legislature
Of Arizona was not properly passed oul
the court for the third time reafnrmed
the doctrine of Field VS.. Clark in the
following manner, saying:
That the law having been filed win
} ard being found in the custody OF the
secretary Of the territory, signed by the
! governor, approved by him. ana
( signed by the president of the territorial
/ legislative council. as duly passed by
that body. and signed by the speaker OF
the territorial house Of representative.
I as duly passed by that body: it was held
that having been thus officially attested
! and approved and committed 10 the Gus
| tody OF the secretary of the territory, as
an act passed by the territorial iegis-
/ lature. the act is to be taken as having
Law and 10 be un:mpeachable by reeitals
] or omissions of recitals in the Journals OF
/ legislative proceedings.
The force of this decision will be easily
] understood when ii is remembered that
section "A of article of our constitution
| is almost an exact copy of paragraph s.
section ;. of the constitution OF the
! United States. Let me put them side by
side that the court may be enabled to OBJ
serve without difficulty their similarity
Section IA IN DIR constitution is: Each
house shall keep a journal of its proceed
lngs, winch, except in case OF executive
sessions, shall be published and the yeas
and nays on any question al the request
OF five members of such house shall be
| entered upon the journal"
The provision in the constitution of
the United States is:
Each house shall keep journal of its
proceedings and from time to time pub
/ fish the same, excepting such parts as
| may in their judgment require secrecy
and the yeas and nays of the members
of either house OF any question shall, al
| the desire of one-fifth of those present
| be entered upon the journals.
And now, in closing this argument,
desire TO ask: What is this contest and
what IS this court asked TO do? The con-
1 stitutiOn at article ., section !, PROVIDES
| THAT the powers of the government
I OF the state of Utah shall he divided INTO
three distinct departments. the legls-
I lative, the executive and the Judiclal'
and no person charged with the exercise
I OF powers properly belonging 10 one or
| the departments shall exercise any
functions appertaining 10 either OF tne
others, except in cases herein expressly
or directly permitted
It is seen from this that the govern
ment of our state is divided into three
I distinct departments" and no person
/ CHARGED with the exercise of powers
/ properly belonging to one of these shall
/ exercise any function appertaimng 10
either Of the others; and yet this court
is asked to invade the domain OF the
legislative department OF the govern
ment and to decide chat law attested
by the legislature. as provided by lne
constitution to have been properly
passed, was not properly passed ana,
therefore. not law. AS well might the
| legislature be asked 10 decide and enact
that a Judgment rendered by this court
according law ana.
therefore not a lawful judgment
But this court is not only asked 10
enter the domain of the legislative oe-
partmenI Of the government ana ann ~
its acts: but 10 do that which would
practically amount 10 revolution ana leaNe
the political society called the state OF
Utah in condition OF anarchy II the
laws that are attacked aIe annulled by
the judgment of this court, then we are
left without any election laws; we can
elect no legislature TO raise and appro7
pirate money to carry on the state gov
| eminent we can elect no county ana
state officers we will have no representa-
/ TIVE and but one senator IN the congress
( OF the United States after March !, lssi'
9rd we VIII have no electoral college TO
/ vote for president and vice-presldent OF
the United States: and, hnallY oeIhot
aliZat.on Will overtake the state ah9 ny
confidence of our people in institutional
liberty viii he endangered. Il not ue-
stroyed. And ali this for whatE me SUP
ject 5 too large and the nsequenceS OF
adverse Gec4SlOn dIt II aux az Win ~
! much danger to descend TO a discussion
| of the Individual purposes of the petition
er and I therefore refrain.
ATTORNEY JOHN NJ. ZANE.
Attorney Zane then opened on behalf
of the petitioner He said the ques-
ton involved here was simply the right
of an individual to an Office and 1t was
necessary when the people expressed
their viii that they do so in Legal
manner This individual had right
/ to prosecute his title 70 the office and
the rights OF individuals were always
respected by this government.
The right of franchise was not an
inherent one. II was provided by the
LEGISLATURE and so were the means loi
carrying it ont and II was essential
that those means by which the people
shall make their Will known be legal
Under our system OF government
where the people have adopted con-
stitution that constitution is binding
and the lowest and humblest individual
in the state is entitled to the benefit Of
those organic laws. 1t is therefore idle
for our friends 20 argue that any oor-
ton of the constitution IS not plnolns
on the legislature and as the iegisla-
: ture passed those two acts not by
yea and nay vote. as required by the
constitution. they violated an organic
law which made those acts Volc-
Mr. zane said the journal Of tho
house showed that the acts in question
had been nassed by viva VOce vote
: Had The journal been silent on thu
point the presumption would be thai
, the bills had been legally passed, but
I when the journal expressly stated tbs
! manner in which the vote had beer
taken. such became competent evil
dence.
] QUESTION OF AUTHORITIES.
Mr.. zane quoted authorities in sup
port of his position that it was proper
10 go behind the enrolled bill 10 th'
journals of the house and the senate
and particularly referred to California
7 and Kentucky decisions.
= Mr.. Rawlins-The latest hentrck1
/ decision is that it is not legal to go be
D hind the enrolled bill
e Mr.. Zane-Wel. then, the supreme
court of Kentucky has gotten on Dott
sides of the question.
Mr. DicksOn-It was wrong first anC
{ when it discovered its error, made th'
= correction.
e Mr.. Zane-We think it was right frs
Y and then went off wrong.
2 MI. Zane then went on to argue tina
the journal of the legislature was tn
! best possible evidence that could b'
: produced. The journal was publicly
( read every morning and any errors
[ found therein were then corrected. /
/ was Il solemn record and was muci
more likely to be correct than the Ger
| tificate Of enrolment. There are also
continued the speaker, overw heinins
authorities 10 sustain the contention