The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1900-04-07
FOR BECKHAM
WAS DECISION
OF THE COURT.
One Republican Dissents from the
Opinion of His Democratic AS
sociates on the Bench.
ACTION OF LEGISLATURE FINAL
Claim Governor Taylor Exceeded Bis
Authority = Case Will be Car
rled to o, S. Supreme Court.

FRANKFORT, KY, April 6.-The
court of appeals to-day handed down Its
decision in the gubernatorlal contest in
favor of Beckham. Judge Du Relic dis
senting. The other two Republican
Judges, Barnam and Guney. handed
down a separate opinion, which differ
ed In It's reasons from the opinion of the
Democratic judges, but agreed with
them in its conclusions. Judge Hobson,
one OF the four Democratic Judges
wrote the opinion of the majority of the
court, affirming the decision of Judge
Field, Of Louisville.
1t recites the work OF the state can
vassing board and Of the contest pro-
ceedlngs in the legislature and all sub
sequent proceedings and continues:
1--WE have no more right to supervise
the decision of the general assembly In
determining the result Of this election
than We have to supervise the action Of
the govurnor in calling a special session
Of the legislature or in parlOning a
criminal or the action of the Legislature
in contracting debts or determining
upon the election of It's members or do
Ing other acts authorized by the constl-
tuition. There is no conflict between
the action of the state canvassing board
and that of the legislature in these
cases.
without Power to Go Behind Returns
cThe state canvasslng board was
Without power to go behind the returns
They were not authorized TO hear evi'
dence and determine who was in truth
elected, but were required to give a GER
tlacate OF election TO those who one the
face Of the returns had received evil
dence to impeach the returns had re-
celved the hlghes; number of votes
For the state oard to have received evil
dence to impeach the returns before
them would have been for them, in ef-
feet, to act as a board of contestlng the
election, and II they had done this they
would have usurped the power vested
In the general assambly by the rconstf-
tntion, for by its express terms only the
general assembly can determine a con-
tested election for governor and lieuten-
ant governor. But the certificate OF the
state board of canvassers is no evidence
as to who was in truth elected. Their
certificate entities the recipient to ex-
erclse the office until the regular con-
stitutionallty shall determine who is the
de jure officer.
Question of Rights Of officers.
"The rights of the de jure officer at
tached when he was elected, although
the result was unknown until 1t was
declared by the proper constitutional
authority. When 1t was so declared IL
was simply the ascertainment OF fact
hitherto in doubt or unsettled. The
rights of the de facto officer under his
certificate from the canvasslng board
were provisional or temporary until the
determination Of the result OF the cleo
tIon, IL adverse to him, they ceased al-
together. Such n determination Of tn.
result Of the election by the proper tri-
bunal did not take from him any pre-
existing right for. IL not in fac: elected,
he had only a right to act until the re-
suit Of the results Of the election could
be determined. We are unable there.
fore to see how this can be distinguish
ed from any other legislative action,
taken in n matter over which the con-
stitution has given the legislature ex'
elusive Jurisdiction and we are there
fore of the opinion that the court is
without Jurisdiction to 70 behind the
record made by the legislature under
the constitution. Such record seems
to us entitled to every presumption in
Its favor which the records of this
court kept under Its supervision, would
be entitled to receive at the hands of tho
Legislature, In a matter befit.
Not Fairly Drawn by Lot.
at is also argued that the contest
board was not fairly drawn by lot, that
certain members of the board were la
bic to objection on the score of partialI-
ty nnd that, therefore, this board Was
not properly constituted. II any Of
these objections were well founded, the
general assembly had full power 10 take
such action as was proper In the prers.
lses It does not appear that any Of
the objections urged were presented to
the general assembly but II they wera
and II refused TO make 1t correction, II
must be presumed that 1t had sufficient
reasons for It's action. Besides, the
board was only u preliminary agency
to take evidence and report that fast to
the general nssembly The assembly
itself finally determined the contest "
A fragrant Disregard of Procedure.
Judges Burunm and Gury. Republi
cans, whllt concurrlng In the courts
having no Jurisdiction dissented from
the reasoning. Judge Burnams sapa-
rate opinion SAYS;
"It is hard 10 imagine a more iin-
grant and partisan disregard OF the
modes Of procedure than Is made mani
fost by the fucts alleged and relied on
by contasiccs and admitted by demur-
rar and lam firmly convinced from Ad-
mittcd facts that the legislature, In the
heat OF anger rnseldof'l BY intense
PURITAN ,xrtmtnt h,vn Conc two
fpithruI, consc 1a,i1us and able public
servants an irgraaIable Injury Ia de-
rriyIng tbrt, OF the oHIrp to Whichs hey