The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1900-05-21

cision of the Kentucky court of ap-
peals
The opinion was handed down by
Chief Justice Fuller and the case was
dismissed for want of jurisdiction and
that the determination of cases Of this
character, contests for state offices,
must necessarily be settled by the legis-
lative branch of the government. That
branch had acted in the Kentucky case
when the general assembly took juris-
diction. There was no appeal from the
assemblys decision, which was favor
able to Goebel and Beckham except to
the tribunal of the people, which tribunal
the chief justice said was always in
session. He also said the case was
purely a state case-that Kentucky was
in the full possession of its faculties as
a member of the union and that there
was no emergency at this time calling
for interference The opinion in the
Kentucky case was not unanimous
Justices Brewer, Harlan, Brown and
McKenna were the dissenting justices.
THE OPINION.
After reviewing the facts in the case
Chief Justice Fuller said: 1T is obvious
ly essential to the independence of the
states and to their peace and tranquility
and their power to prescribe the quail
fications of their own officers, the ten
ure of their offices, the manner of their
election and the grounds on which the
tribunals before which and the mode
such elections may be contested should
be exclusive and free from external in
reference except SO far as plainly pro-
vided by the constitution of the United
States and where controversies over the
election of state officers have reached
the state courts in the manner provided
and have been determined in accordance
with state constitutions and laws the
cases must necessarily be rare in which
the interference of this court can be
properly invoked"
The chief justice then reviewed the
cases of Boyd VS.. Thayer, Wilson vs.
North Carolina, Kennard VS.. Louisiana
and Foster VS.. Kansas, and continued:
1.-The grounds on which our juriSdic-
ton is sought to be maintained in the
present case are set forth in the errors
assigned to the effect in substance:
q That the action Of the general
assembly in the matter of these con-
tests deprives plaintiff in error of their
offices without due process of law
s'2-That the action of the general
assembly depriveS the people of Ken
lucky of the right to choose their own
representatives secured by the guaran-
tee of the federal constitution of a Re
publican form of government to every
state and deprives them of their politi-
cal liberty without due process Of law
For more than 100 years the consti-
tuition of Kentucky has provided that
contested elections for governor and
lieutenant governor shall be determined
by the general assembly. In 1899 by a
committee to be selected from both
houses of the general assembly and
framed and regulated in such manner
as shall be directed by law; since 1860
by both houses of the general assembly
according to such regulations as may
be estab blished by law.
''The highest court of the state has
often held and in the present case has
again declared that under their consti-
tutional provisions the power of the
general assembly to determine the re-
suit is exclusive and that its decision is
not open to judicial review. (Authori-
ties quoted here)
..The statute enacted for the purpose
of carrying the provisi 4 of the co sti-
tuition into effect has been in existence
in substance since 1799 and many of