Daily inter mountain. [volume] (Butte, Mont.) 1881-1901, 1899-12-08
IT IS STILL UNSETTLED.

1t is to be regretted that no demo-
cratic newspaper in the state of Montana
feels competent to tackle the problem
in civil government brought to the front
by the action of our chief executive IN
trying to annul the work of the legisla-
tive assembly. Were he to issue a writ
ten protest against the enforcement OF
some law passed by the Sixth legislature,
to which his signature had been at
tached, no doubt the matter would
excite universal discussion. Blu when
he applies identically the same principle
to the work of the legislature in another
direction, the bourbon organs are as
silent at the grave.
1t was as much the duty of the assem-
bly, to elect a senator, to represent this
state in the senate of the United States,
as it was to enact laws for the local
government of our people. In the exer-
else of this function it performed a duty
peculiarly its own-a duty that belongs
exclusively to the legislative branch of
the government.
The law gives to the chief executive
the right to veto within a given length
of time any bill passed by the Legislature,
just as it gives to the supreme court the
right to subsequently determine the con-
stitutionality of any measure which has
been duly enacted into law. Blu the
governor has no right to annul the work
of the legislature as a laW-nlaking body,
after he has affixed his signature to a
bill. and thereby given it the qualifica-
ton of law. Whether he has the right
to use his position as the executive
branch of the state government to annul
any other work performed by the legis-
lative branch, after he has affirmed that
work with his official signature, is the
question in issue.
The Sixth legislative assembly elected
a senator by due process of law. and
the governor certified to the fact in at.
taching his official signature to the GER
tificate of election. He now sumo the
PISI OSdtlVCe VI uSlIiS IHs dill DIS SOY,
ernor Of the state of Montana to annu
the work of the legislature in electing {
senator. The object of the protest
signed by Mr.. Smith as governor, is tt
create a senatorial vacancy by destroy
ing the work officially performed by thu
legislative branch of the state govern
ment, after he had ratified that worl
with his signature on the certificate o
election.
The question of the methods employe,
by Mr.. Clark and his friends to secur
that gentleman's election, whether good
bad, or Indifferent. have no direct bear
ing on the problem in civil government
suggested by the governors action
Neither is it necessary to discuss in thi
connection the question of taste dis
played by the governor in imputing Grim
inal conduct to a coordinate branch O
government, before any court decisio
has been rendered to that effect. TIL
proposition in issue is purely and simpI
the right of the executive to annul tn
work of the legislature, after the wor
of the latter has been constitutional
performed. In other words, has Cover
nor Smith exceeded his powers in attach
ing his signature as governor to a pro
test against the seating of a man VIII
was elected senator by the Legislative as
senbly, and who holds a certificate {
election signed by himself?
If he has a right to take this ste!
on the grounds thai the party electe
is disqualified from holding the ofio
IN account of having violated some Law
why can he not set himself up as
permanent court of record to pass on til
legal qualifications of other men chose
by the legislature for the performane
of certain duties? The situation is a
interesting one. and, as above stated,
is a matter of regret that the learne
opponents of democracy in his stat
absolutely refuse to throw any light @
1t. 1t seems to be a question AAvhic
the bourbon newspapers do not a
clamor for a ance to speak at the san
time.