New-York tribune., 1900-05-22
BECKHAM NOW GOVERNOR.
THE SUPREME COURT REFUSES TO IN
TERFERE IN KENTUCKY.

TAYLOR'S APPEAL DISMISSED ON THE
GROUND THAT NO FEDERAL oUEs-
TION is INvoLvED-THREE
JUSTICES DISSENT.
Washington. May 21.-The United States Su-
preme Court to-day decided the Kentucky Gov
ernorship case In favor of Beckham. dismissing
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. Just
ices Brewer and McKenna also dissented from
portions Of the opinion. The was dismissed
for want Of jurisdiction.
THE CHIEF JUSTICES OPINION.
After reviewing the facts in the case. the
Chief Justice said:
1t is obviously essential to the independence OF
the States and to their peace and tranquility and
own Officers + the tenure of their offices the man
ner OF their election and the grounds on Wllcn tIe
such eiections may be contested should be ex-
elusive and tree Gn5a sKerba bS the Of
the United States where controversies over the
eoars in Of hs pTovded
termined in accordance with state m n
which the interference of this Court can be prop
erly invoked.
The Chief Justice then reviewed various cases
and the contentious of counsel for Taylor that
the General Assemblv's action deprived Taylor
and other contestants Of their offices without
due process of law and violated the clause guar
anteeing q republican form Of government, and
continuing said:
For more than hundred years the Constitution
of Kentucky has provided that contested elections
for Governor and Lieutenant-G Governor shall be
determined by the General Assembly. The highest
of the State has often held, and in the pres
ont case has again declared, that under their con-
Gfitn General
Assembly TO determine the result is exclusive and
The ITS for the purpose Of
e ee m of m hs fS @ nd ha
of the States have similar censtituonal provisi0ns
statute to be objected to as in any manner OBJ
noxious constitutional objection. but that plain;
Assembly under the statute under the Judgment of
the State courts declining to disturb that action iS
proceednes i void want al @ @
Constitution and statutes there no ques,,
on at equal nmbeF Of votes n or co Of the ~ Legal G
General Assembly could be invoked only by
to Of Legal
notices put forward case. not of the election of
the Contest Boards ana the General Assembly had
However, exceedinglg broad and set np variety
of grounds, and specifically stated that the con-
eaily and rightfuliy elected Governor and Lieu
testants were not. And the determinaiion Of the
Assembly
testants had received the highest number Of legal
votes cast for any candidate for said offices at
Governor and Lieutenant Governor. a determine
tion which which adiudged the notices to be sufficient,
the Jurisdiction Of the tribunal
PUBLIC OFFICE NOT PROPERTY
We repeat then that the contention is that al
though the statute, furnished due process Of law,
denied it. and that the Court of Appeals in hold
ing TO the rules that where mode Of contesting
ton Of the State th mode is eScsve Ky and in
holdGg b as the power to determine was vested in
Of that body was not subject judicial revision,
ton ton The Court of Appeals did indeed adtndge
that the & case did not come within the XIyth
of Governor or Iheutenant-Governor. being created
& fRe in W he e25 Of aa a held @
shtHent m and avs eassed pursuant thereto so
of the result of an election in the manner provided
adverse to claimant could not be regarded as
must be admitted that the view that public Office
this country.
Quoting Butler against the United States and
Crenshaw against the United States, the Chief
Justice continued:
The decisions numerous to the effect that
public offices are mere agencies or trusts and not
ments property. secured by contract, but compen-
he or6 the s
ature lat from ab9lishine public office or diminish
eumbent change it's character, make it property.
True the restrictions limit the power of the Legs-
tions may be removed by constitutional amend
pubc ocer to the pubic is oI geneay 81
right.
The Court of Appeals not only held that the Of
five of Governor and Lieutenant Governor
property under the Constitution of Kentucky but
moreover that Court was of opinion that the de-
cislon OF these contested elections did deprive
plaintiffs in error of any pre-existing right Our
system OF election was unknown TO the common
subject ('OnSti-
tuition and statutes passed hereunder. In the
view of the Court of Appeals the mode of contest
the rights of the officer who held the certifcate of
the State Board Of Canvassers were provisional
OF temporary until the determination Of the result
OF the election. as provided In the Constitution and
upon that determination if adverse to him. they
ceased altogether
FOURTEENTH AMENDMENT NOT VIOLATED
In fact the statute provided that when the in
cumbent wa adjudged not to be entitled his powers
shall Immediately cease" and under the Constitu-
tion the holder of the certificate manifestly held
1t for the time being subject to the issue of
Of the Court of Appeals in declining to 90 Behind
the tribunal vested by the State Constitution and
laws with the ultimate determination of the right
Fourteenth Amendment.
After quoting Section 4 Article XIV of the
Constitution, in which the United States guar
antees to every State republican form of gov
ernment, etc, the Court saws it was long since
settled that the enforcement of this guarantee
belonged to the political department.
In Luther against Borden 7 Howard / II was
held that the question which of the two opposing
Governments OF Rhode Island was the legitimate
political department. and when that department
had decided the courts bound to take the
that as the Supreme Court of Rhode Isiand had
cecided the point the well settled rule applied that