The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1900-03-25

VAIN u E--N KUN, Cor. central and NAN;
! ROCK ISLAND DRUG STORE, 10 e,
Douglas; GOODIN, 621 e. Oak.
| GEHRING, 400 z. Douglas.
county seat of Grant county having been
| once located, and no express provisions
made in the act for changing the same,
that consequently this legislation under
and by virture of said section Of the
organic act is in conflict with said act
Of congress, and consequently void. For
a more definite understanding and proper
Interpretation of this act Of congress,
which it is claimed is in conflict with
the legislative enactments of the terri
tory it would be well to consider the Ian
guage Of this act in thal fight of the laws
then in force in the territory at that
time. When the organic act. which is
termed An act for the purpose Of facili-
taunG the organization Of a temporary
government in the territory Of Oklahoma.
was passed, May 2 1880, Oklahoma had
no government Of its own. There were no
counties or divisions of its lands except
such as were made by the government
survey. The organic act was passed to
thoughtful and convenient thing for con-
gress to establish counties in these lands
The counties thus established, being sew
en- in number, are in such act named
numerically, and county seats located in
each county. This is the territory now
commonly known as Old Oklahoma
Confress then further provided in this
same act: That the county seats located
by this act may be changed in due form
as the territory legislature may provide
This provision will suggest tothe think
ing mind two reasons for its enactment
reasons which, no doubt, presented them
selves very forci5ly TO congress; first. to
emphasize the declaration that the coun-
ties were established and the county
seats located, at least temporarily. and,
second, that the people ought to be al
lowed to change those conditions with
out being confronted with the sugges-
ton that as the counties were establish
ed and county seats located by the or
ganic act of the territory perhaps any
desired change could not be authorized
by the territorial 'legislature-the very
identical question that is raised in this
case. Now, in the course of time it be-
comes necessary or was thought advisa-
bic by the United States government to
enlarge the territory of Oklahoma by
adding the Cherokee Outlet, and the gov
eminent, having already provided a gov
eminent for the territory of Oklahoma,
having shown in its organic act the dis
position of congress toward counties and
county seats having provided in such act
that the legislative power of the terri
tory should extend to all rightful sub
jects OF legislation, congress passed the
act of March s. 1893 heretofore mention
ed, in which the secretary OF the interior
was directed to establish counties III the
lands TO be opened and to reserve in each
county lands to be located for county
seat purposes. Did the congress
Of the United States intend the location
of county seats in these seven counties
of the Cherokee Outlet to be permanent
fixed and Interchangeable legislation. or
was it intended to provide a temporary
condidon-this condition to exist in each
OF the new counties until the people Of
any county should desire to change the
condition ny an election held under the
laws Of the territory. passed by author
ity Of the organic act? To adopt the
theory that such intention was to estab-
fish such county seats permanently
would be to hold that in the territory OF /
Oklahoma, a. the present time, this con-
dition prevails. Chapter % Of the statu-
ties Of 1898, which purports to be a gen
eral statute applying with equal force to /
all parts Of the territory, would be valid
and binding as to the seven counties or +
gained Of what IS known as Old Okla +
homa' and would be void as To the sew (
en- new counties created out OF the Chero- !
kee In other words. Old oklahoma I.
could hold county seat elections in any or /
all Of the seven counties and the law /
would be valid, constitutional and bind I
ing; but as 10 the seven new counties +
embraced in the Cherokee Outlet al /
though for all purposes they are parts q +
the same territory. this act would be IN +.
constitutional and void and no county
seat election could De held. In othar I
words, does the act of March 8. 1898. re- I
peal the organic act in reference to To- /
eating or relocating Of county seats?"
1T is Wen recognized principle Of I.
law that repeats OF statutes by !npica- (
tien are not favored in law. Now. read 4
irs Of this act Opening the Cherokee {
outlet VIII show that there Is no language {
employed in such act which amounts %
an express repeal Of the Organic act. nor
Is there language which by a fair inter 1
probation, repsals the same By implica- /
ton"
After quoting from numerous suthori- T
ties tending 20 show that repeaI by i'm f
pHcation IS not favored fn Jaw. the opir-
ion proceeds; The act IN question. L Z
seems TO rs. II It had been the leEisls-
tive intent q congress iB making such
act 10 have repealed in whole or IN part
The Organic act governing the territory
Of Oklahoma. previously passed or lin
itinE or abridEinE sts application 80 sati F
territory, or any part thereof. they could
pave, and undoubtedly would have. used
language clearly. concisely ARD uumistak- f.
ably indicating such intention. There .
being no sucA intention expressly max
ifested, or That ear reas1aabiy be flr- 4
piled from such acy We take Il that
there was no intention On the part 81
congress in passing said act 20 repeal .
or sn any wSy restrict or limit the
operation II the organic ACT"
The remainder ~ The opinion s. taken
zap in a legal argument showing ,hss
the CrEa2ic act Is in tulf force and e.
feet. and II al is parfs and terms ap-