Warren sheaf. [volume] (Warren, Marshall County, Minn.) 1880-current, 1900-05-24
Favorable 70 B[|INHA|h.
United States Supreme Court De
cides It Has No Jurisdiction
in Kentucky Case.

i
cides It Has No Jurisdiction
IN Kentucky Case.
OPINION RENDERED BY JUSTICE FULLER,
Vigorous Dissenting Opinion De-
Iivered by Justice Harlan-Taylor
Receives News of Decision ut
Observation-Disclosures Display JOY
by Ringing OF BELLS, Etc.
Washington, May 22.-The United
States supreme court Monday decided
the Kentucky governorship case in IA
vor Of Gov. 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. Justices
Brewer, Brown and McKenna also dis
sented from portions of the opinion.
Lacks jurisdictions.
The opinion was handed down by
Chief Justice Fuller and the case was
dismissed for want of jurisdiction. He
said the court should be the last to
overstep the bounds limiting it's own
jurisdiction and that the determines
ton OF cases of this character, con-
tests for state Office, must necessarily
be settled by the political branch Of
the government. That branch had,
acted in the Kentucky case when the
general assembly took jurisdiction.
Purely State Case.
There was no appeal from the as
sembly's decision, which was favor
able to Goebel and Beckham, except
to the tribunal of the people, which
tribunal, the chief justice said, was al
ways in session. He also said the case
was purely state case-that Ken
lucky was in full possession of it's fac
ulties as a member of the union, and
that there was no emergency at this
time calling for interference.
Justice Fuller's Comments.
After reviewing the facts in the case
Chief Justice Fuller said:
''It is obviously essential to the inde-
pendence of the states and to their peace
and tranquility that their power to pre-
scribe the qualifications of their own Off
GERS, the tenure Of their offices, the manner
of their election and the grounds on which
the tribunals before which and the mode
In which such elections may be contested
should be exclusive and free from external
interference except SO far as plainly pro-
vided by the constitution of the United
States, and where controversies over the
election of state officers have reached the
state courts in the manner provided and
have been determined in accordance with
state constitutions and laws the cases
must be rare in which the interference of
this court can be properly invoked"
Other Cases Cited.
The chief justice then reviewed the
cases of Boyd VS.. Thayer, Wilson VS..
North Carolina, Kennard VS.. Louisiana
and Foster VS.. Kansas, and continued:
THE grounds on which our jurisdiction
Is sought to be maintained in the present
case are set forh in the errors assigned to
the effect in substance:
-. That the action of the general assem-
bly, in the matter of these contests de-
prives plaintiff in error of their offices with
out due process of law.
-. That the action of the general assem-
bly, deprives the people of Kentucky of
the right to choose their own representa-
tives secured by the guarantee of the fed
eral constitution of a republican form of
government to every state and deprives
them of their political liberty without due
process of law. 80
For more than 100 years the constitution
of Kentucky has provided that contested
elections for governor and lieutenant gov
ernor shall be determined by the general
assembly. In 1893 by committee to be Sc
lected from both houses Of the general as
sembly and framed and regulated in such
manner as shall be directed by law since
1850 by both houses of the general assem-
bly, according to such regulations as may
be established by law
The highest court of the state has often
held and in the present case has again de-
clared that under their constitutional
provisions the power of the general assem-
bly, to determine the result is exclusive,
and that its decision is not open to judicial
review. authorities quoted here).
The statute enacted for the purpose of
carrying the provision of the constitution
into effect has been in existence in sub
stance since 1893, and many Of the states
have similar constitutional provisions and
similar statutes
We do not understand this statute to
be objected to as in any manner obnoxious
to constitutional objection, but that plain
tiff in error complains of the action of the
general assembly under the statute under
the Judgment of the state courts declining
to disturb that action
Vigorous Dissenting Opinion.
After the chief justice had con-
cluded, Justices McKenna, Brewer
and Harlan read opinions dissenting
from the opinion of the court, Justice
Harlan entirely, and the others on
certain points. Justice Harlan, in his
dissent, quoted various authorities,
and then said:
NotwithstaI ding these adjudications,
the decision to-day is that this court has
no Jurisdiction to inquire whether the citi-
zen has been deprived, without due process
of law, of an Office held by him under the
constitution and laws of his state If the
contest between the one holding the Office
and the person seeking to hold it is deter
minable by the legislature, in prescribed
mode. this court, it appears, cannot in
@quire whether that mode was pursued, and
cannot; interfere for the protection Of the
incumbent. even If the final action Of the
legislature was confessedly capricious and
arbitrary. inconsistent with the recog-
nized principles that belong to due process
<N< los *, =