The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1900-05-22
BECKHAM is NOW GOVERNOR.
SUPREME COURTS DECISION is
AGAINST TAYLOR.

Court Declared 1t Had No Jurisdic-
tion In the Kentucky Case--source
of Appeal From Legislature Is 90
the PeopIe-PubIic oface Declared
Not to BE Propcrty-Justicc Ear.
Ian Delivers n Vigorous Dissent
ing Opinion.
Washington, May 21.-The United States
Supreme Court to-day decided the Ken
lucky governorship case in favor OF Gov.
Bedkham, the Democrat, in both the quo
warranto and the equity proceedings. For
want of jurisdiction the court dismissed
the writ of error from the Kentucky
Court of Appeals.
The opinion was handed down by Chief
Justice Fuller. and vigorous dissenting
opinion was delivered by Justice Harlan,
the only one to advocate reversal of the
Kentucky courts decision. Justices
Brewer Brown and McKenna also dis
sented from portions of the opinion.
In dismissing the writ of error the
chief justice said the court should be the
last to overstep the bounds limiting its
own jurisdiction, and that in the deter
mination of dases of this character, con-
tests for state office must necessarily be
settled by the political branch of the gov
ernment That branch had acted in the
Kentucky case when the General Assem-
bly, took Jurisdiction. There was no ap-
peal from the assembly's decision, which
was favorable to Goebel and Beckham, ex-
eept to the tribunal of the people. which
tribunal the chief justice said, was al
ways in session.
He also said tho case was purely a state
case-that Kentucky was in the full pos
session OF its faculties as member of
the Union and that there was no emersen-
cy at this time calling for interference
| of the general government to enforce con-
| stitutional guarantees or to put down
| d nestle violence.
For moro than one hundred years the
constitution of Kentucky has provided
| that contested elections for Governor and
! lieutenant governor shall be determined
| by the general assembly.
The highest court Of the state has Of
ten held and in the present case has again
declared that under their constitutional
provisions the power of the general as
| semhly to determine the result is exclu-
s.ve, and that It's decision is not open to
/ judicial review. Many OF the states have
| milar constitutional provisions and SINH
/ lar statutes.
1--WE do not understand this statute to be
! objected TO as In any manner obnoxious to
| constitutional provision but that plaintiff
in error complains of the action of the
General Assembly under the statute and
| the Judgment OF the state courts declining
to disturb that action"
Public ONCE Not Property.
The chief Justice quoted numerous decis-
ions holding that public offices are mere
agencies or trusts and not property as
such, nor are the salaries CT emoluments
property secured by contract, but compen-
! sation for services actually rendered.
In short" he said, "the nature OF the
| relation OF a rublic officer to the public
is generally spraking inconsistent with
e,th-r properly or contract right.
''Ths Court OF Arpsas not only held
that tho office cf Governor or OF lieuten-
| ant governcr was not properly under the
constitution of kentucky, but moreover
! that court was of the opinion that the
dsclsisn OF thsse con est.d ele~ficns did
not Deprive plaintiffs In error Ct any pre-
existing right. Our systsm of elections
was unlSncwn to the common law and
! tho whcle subject Is regulated by consti-
tutlons and statutes passed hereunder
1T Ia clsar that the judgment OF the
| Court CT Appeals In declining TO go be-
hind the tribunal vested BIZ the state con-
s'ituticn and laws with ths ultimate de-
termination of the right to these Offices.
denied no right secured by the fourteenth
amendment"
After quoting section T. article IA, OF the
constitution, In which the United States
guarantees to ever state a republican form
OF government. ETC.. the court says It was
long since settled that the enforcement of
this guarantee belonged TO the political
department
1--WE must decline to take Jurisdiction m
the ground of deprivation OF rights en-
braced by the fourteenth amendment.
without due process of Jaw or of the viola
ton of the guarantee OF republican form
| OF government by reason of similar depri-
walton. The writ of error is dismIsssh
A similar order was entered in the in
junction case between the same parties.
The Dissenting Opinions.
There were three dissenting opinions.
| Justi1e McKenna was the first of the dis
senters TO be heard. He stated that while
he concurred In the result he was not pre-
pared to say that public Office was not
| property.
Justice Brewer also based his dissent on
the point of Office as property. He also
held the view that the United States courts
were not without jurisdiction, but con-
| tended that the decision of the Kentucky
court should DO affirmed instead OF dis
missing the writ Of error. He says the
prescribed procedure was followed in
awarding the contestants the officee, and
that he did not ignore the many allega-
tions OF wrong, such as that the selection
of the committee was not by lot, but was
trick on tho part OF the clerk of the
assembly.
Justice Brewer said no question could
be raised in the courts as to honesty or
integrity OF the members of the Legisia-
ture in the discharge of their duties That
lies between them and their constituents.
In conclusion. Justice Brewer agrees
f.f Ann s,f mt mol ~
that upon the award of the assembly no
other Judgment can be entered than that
which sustains 1t.
Justice HarIan's Views.
Justice Harlan, in his dissenting opinion,
quotes various authorities and says that
Notwithstanding them the decision to-day
is that this court has no jurisdiction 10
inquire whether the citizens had been de-
prived. without due process OF law, of an
Office held by him under the constitution
and laws Of his state. II the contest be-
tween tho one holding the Office and the