The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-05-01

| contests for Governor and Lieutenant Gov
ernOr, which he said. had stood in its
/ present form for substantially 100 years.
! he said that IL provided in its terms a
] procedure that was due process Of law
. The constitutions or laws Of fifteen States
] contained in substance the same provisions
for settling their contests as did the con-
stituti0n and laws of Kentucky II the
! Kentucky provisions for settling their con-
/ tests be declared invalid said Mr. Nc
Quown. the same decision would wipe out
/ the provisions made by these other fifteen
/ States for accomplishing the same end.
The law afforded due process Of law. But
IL was claimed in pleadings and argument,
he said, that In the execution or admins
tratlOn OF the law. Taylor had been de-
prived Of his property without due process
I OF law
In the course Of a depreciation Of the eX-
/ erCise Of the power pstitioned for in this
4 case Nr. MCQuown said that il would
make the judicial branch paramount 10 the
legislative by reviewing its action in the
discharge Of the duty devolved on it by
/ law He proceeded from that to argue that
the action of the Legislature in the con-
test at issue was final. Its jurisdiction in
the matter by the constitution Of the State
was exclusive
Since the case was decided by the State
court upon the sole ground that Taylor
did not show title to the Office. IL was un-
necessary. in the view of the counsel, to en-
quire whether a political office WIS prop
erty within the meaning Of the fourteenth
amendment. That question could only
arise in a case in which pre-existing
title admitted or Pstablishedt was divest-
ed by some act Of the State A political
Office created by a State was not property
within the meaning Of the amendment
all nr-nE hnt
by Judge Taft in the case of Sweeney VS..
Poyntz Circuit Court for the District Of
Kentucky. February IL 1900. brought TO
enjoin the State Board of Canvassers from
hearing or deciding the contest over the
Office Of the Auditor OF Public Accounts OF
Kentucky on the ground Of fraud, in which
the court refused an injunction and dis
missed the BILL
Mr McQuown said the plaintiff here
sought TO evade the judgment Of the
General Assembly. upon two grounds:
First. that its action was fraudulent:
second. that having been previously pro-
rogued the General Assembly was not in
session. He said that the courts had no
right nor power TO enquire into the mo-
tives OF the Legislature taking the action
it had. The rule had been stated by Jus
tice Cooley in his Constitutional Lin
itations. where he said Although it
has sometimes been urged at the bar that
the courts ought to enquire into the mo-
tives Of the Legislature. when fraud and
corruption were alleged. and annul their
action if the allegations were established.
the argument has in no case been acceded
to by the judiciary and they have never
allowed the enquiry to be entered upon.
The laws of Kentucky Gevolved the duty
Of determining contested election cases
involving the Governor and Lieutenant
Governor upon the Legislature. and in the
discharge Of that duty il was entitled TO
the same confidence in its honesty and in
JeEriJy as when engaged in enacting a
Law. Concerning the contention that t1e
Legislature was not really in session at
the time IL declared G0ehel elected, be-
cause it had been previously proIogued,
Mr. McQuOWn said IL had no basis, as there
was 70 legal warrant fer such action by
the Governor
Justice Brewer-Has the Court OF Ap- I
peals passed ca that NATTER
Alr. McQuown-It has, in this very case. +
Justice BreWer-it is a State question. /
is il nut2 a... ....
Ar. McQuowu-I think so.
AT this point M McQuoWn. who had
been speaking with considerable difficulty. .
suffering from a severe hcarseness. sus- /
pended his arEuuient and submitted the .
case on behalf OF Governor Beckham.
The court then adjourned until today,
when former Governor Bradley will con- .
clude the argument on behalf of Mr.. Tay- /
Tor