The daily morning Astorian. [volume] (Astoria, Oregon) 1883-1899, 1899-01-25
judiciary Committees Summing
Up OF the Bill for Addi-
liOnal Justices,
Instrument Is One OF the Most Com
pletc Ever Drawn In Oregon
and Is Given In Full,

vcing attorney IN tho statr paallscs that
yomO,hIng oughs to hc done 70 r,licvc
tho supr7lne court "a constituted vi tho
enormous and n,gvasing volume oc bust.
meas now hcing transferred to that trl-
huual Various plans have bccn proposed
to r'licvo this ca,dtuon. among thom tho
ono for vDlarginE tho suprrmu court by
tho CREATION of two additional juptlcca
and another limiting tho right ur appcal
from tho ctrcuiy court to suits nNuN l,m
a subject matter of more than oor,aln
/ pvouniary value Much intvvatIug dis
/ cusslon haA been aroused pro and con on
tho schcn,c to culUrEv the supreme court
somc authorities vonlrudlns tnr tho lcsla-
htwreS righI' TO do 50 aud u,hcrs OF
/ equal weight dvny ms tho constitutional.
ity of such proc~cdiug Tho bill provl,l-
tug tor an lncrvasrd supreme court Was
R duo oourso rvgvrrcd to tho senate
. Judiciary committee. and ou laht Thuss-
day Il w7,s reported back to tho senate
With an adverse Recommendation svna-
tor e.. ", Fulton. a, chairman ur the cvm.
udigoc. Wrote aud submitted Jhn rvpart
which wus described by both tho ppoc-al
correspondent, ~ tho urcsuulan and the
Associated l'rvas az The umo 40 a
mastery summing up ut thc con-tiJu.
sys,al objcuuons," Tho rcpor, 10 quite
/ lengthy. huI li lH such a complete Wind.
+ cation ~ tho restrictions imposed 10y tho
cons, tuition aa to constitute ouo OF rho
mos, important constructions " that
/ instrument ever mado within tho history
o' The state Mr. rrl,ou'a report VIII
doubtless become q preyedyut on con-u.
tu,tunAl Interpretation which viii carry
wcSgh, and authority not only In orvgpu
'cr mauy yvar 70 oomg. bu, In various
other states whuru such questions may
arise Throughout, tho Union Tho report
a full ls IN follows
/ Mr. President Your committee on ia.
dietary. TO whom wus referred house
b'll No. 2, ocing a It'll Tor an act e. In.
/ cryosc tho number OF jus,lcra OF tho uu.
promo court. bcg leave 90 report that
| they have had tho same under connldrra-
| ton, and would respectfully rrporI an
/ follows:
On the question OF tho dcsruhillty. and
even thu Necessity ot anordlng the sti.
| prcrno court rrlicf, your committee n
/ N entire accord. and were q clear that
/ this blll. II enacted. would not be- In
conflict with tho constitution tho com.
! mlttvu would douhilran unanimously rcc.
ummond It's pasragv.
/ tloc ihV question however. NJ tho
power ~ the lsv,'nptur- To enact the
law proposed. your committee Is upt in
accord A majority ot yhv committee n
of tho opln,on that lhc lcg,Lalur, Is
without authority 10 Increase tho mum.
+ byr VI Justices VI tho supreme court. and
IN View % tho Importance ot the qu-,.
. ;lon and tho interest manifest therein.
wc feel juslncd in submitting briefly
some of the reasons which have lm.
pressed us with this conviction.
Section 10 Of article VII Of the constl.
/ tutioa reads na loUuwH.
see 10 when tho white population
Of tho state snail tm0iut In two hundred
| thousand. the legislative assembly may
[ provide for tho election Of supreme and
/ circuit Judges In distinct clasa,,a. uur II
which shall Cp0slst Dt thrc. iuatlcca Of
tho supreme court who shall MT perform
circuit duty. ana the other class shall
consist OF the necessary number OF cr-
| cult judges, who shalt hold ruIl terms
/ without allotment AMI who shall take
| .hc same oath lR Tho -rrr,mo lu g'v."
/ II b pointed out By thoro who are OF
the opinion that tho bill Is not In viola.
/ ton OF the constitution. that while tho
section quoted provides that the supreme
court shall consist Of three Justlcca. Il
/ does not say hat tho number shall never
| bo Increased. and In support Of their view
/ that the legislature may properly enact
/ tho proposed law. they quote that IA
mnl!ar rule applicable 10 the lnterprc-
| tatlOn and construction of state consti-
| tutions. namely. that such Instruments
/ are not grants Of power but are llmita-
/ tlons only Of the power OF tho lcgisa-
turc, tho legislature being vested with all
| legislative power not delegated 10 the
general government by tho federal con-
BtItutlon, or expressly or by necessary
| implication, inhibited by the state consu-
tuition. While such ls tho rule, tho ques-
| ton presented Is, does tho language
above quoted or does tho constitution
taken as whole expressly or by ncccB-
| sary Inference, limit the number Of JUS
tees OF the supreme court to thrcc2
In considering this question It ia
important 10 bear In mind that there are
other rules Of Interpretation and con-
structlon besdes tho ono above mcn-
TONED. For Instance. We believe Il To- be
| universally conceded that in Interpreting
tho language and constituting the constl-
| tuition, the language er1ployed must be
interpreted in lis ordinary accoptatlon
and meaning. and the constitution must
be considered az whole for the purpose
| Of arriving at tho intention Of It's franz
| erh In any one particular-Coolsy's Con-
| sututlonal Limitations, pages 70, 7S 70.
lO2, i5G.
The constitution provides a system OF
government and tho powers Of that gov.
ernmcnt are divided into three separate
departments. namely: % the legislative;
(2) the executive, which includes the ad-
minis'rltiye; and (J tho judicial The
legislative power IL vested in the legls-
lativo asscmbly (which shall consist OF
senate and house Of Representatives.
II will probably not be argued that a
third house or legislative body could be
created by the legislature, yet the power
to do 80 10 not IN 80 many words ex-
pressly denied.
Tho chief executive power Of the state
IL "Vested IN the governor" and II will
hardly be contended that two or more
governors may be provided by the lcgls-
lature, yet the power 80 TO do is not In
express language inhibited.
Il follows, then, that II will not in
all cases suffice 70 invoke the rule that