The Van Buren press., 1900-05-26

deprives them of their political hperty
vIthcut due process of law -.
Foi more than one hundred years Ine ne
constitution of Kentucky has proNlue5i
that contested elections ioT soN (. nj liu.
Iieutenant-g governor shall be determine
hy the general assembly In 10y, py
Committee to be selected from both houses
of the general assembly and Iramea ana
regulated in such manner as shali p,tnz pe ui.
rected by law; since 1850, by both houses
of the general assembly according TO suc'i
regulations as may be established py
law. -u -,
The statute enacted for the purpose OF
often held and in the present case mas
again declared, that under their consul
tutional provisions the power OF the gen
eral assembly to determine the result is
exclusive, and that its decision 's not open
to judicial review. (Authorities quotel
here. q
"The statute enacted for the purpose or
carrying me provision of the constit u
tion into effect has been In existence IN
substance since 1899, and many OF tne
states have similar constitutional pro''-
sions and similar statutes.
The Dissenting Justices.
after the chief justice had con-
cluded Justices McKenna, Brewer ami
Harlan read opinions dissenting from
the opinion of the court, Justice Har'
Ian entirely, and the others on certain
points. Justice Harlan in his dissent
quoted various authorities and then
said:
Notwithstanding these adiudications,
the decision to-day Is that this court mas
no iurisdicto to inquire whether the Cit
izen has been deprived, without Que pro-
cess of law, of an office held by him un-
der the consultation and laws OF this
state. If the contest between the one
holding the Office and the person seeking
TO hold 1t Is determinable by the leglsld- :
ture, in prescribed mode, TINS court, u
appears, can not inquire whether that
mode was pursued, and can not interfere
for the protection of the incumbent, even
If the final action of the legislature was
confessedly capricious and arhtfary m
consistent with the recognized prlnclples
that belong to due process or law, anu
not based, in any degree, on the evidence
taken in the contest. If the kentucky
legislature had wholly disre2arded the
mode prescribed by the statutes OF that
state and without appointing board OF
contest composed of its own members,
had by Joint resolution simply declared
Guebel to be governor, and especially II
such action had been held by the highest
court of the state to be conclusive, thls
court, as we are informed by the decision
just rendered, would be without Jurlsuic-
lion. to protect the incumbent. for the
reason, as is now adjudged, that the Of
fee In dispute Is not property WITHIN the
meaning of the fourteenth amendment.
80 tina: while we may inquire whether
the citizens land, or his mules have been
taken from him by the legislative, exeru
tive or juiicial authorities of his state
without due process of law, we may not
int,uiro whether the legislature or judi
cial authorizes of state have, without
due process of law, ousted one lawfully
elected and holding the office of governor
Tor a fixed term, with a salary which
can not be diminished during such term,
and put into his place one whom the peo'
pie nave said should not exercise the au-
thorlty appertaining to that high posi-
ton. When the fourteenth amendment
forbade any state from depriving any per-
son of life liberty or property without
due process of law, / had supposed that
the purpose was to guard citizens against
being deprived Of any legal right In vio-
ation of the fundamental guarantees thai
nhere In due process of law.