The age-herald., 1900-05-22
The State Alone Can Settle Such
 Matters.
FOUR JUSTICES DESERVED
Wild Demonstration Occurred at Frank fort When the News Was Re- ceived- Republicans Prepar-
 ing for Hot Campaign

Washington, May 2.-Tlre supreme court today finally decided the Kentucky gov- ernorship case in favor of Governor Beck ham, dsmissing the writ of error from the Kentucky court of appeals. The opinion was handed down by Chief Justice Fuller, and vigorous dissenting opinion was de- livered by Justice Harlan. Justices Brewer, Brown and McKenna also dissented from portions of the opinion.
 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 determination of cases of this character, contests for state offices, 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. There was no appeal from the assemblys decision, which favor able to Goebel and Beckham, except to the tribunal of the people, which tribunal the chief justice said was in session.
 He also said the case was purely state case-that Kentucky was in full possession of its faculties as a member of the union, and that there was emergency at this time calling for interference.
 After reviewing the facts in the case, Chief Justice Fuller said:
 Tt Is obviously essential to the independ- ence of the states and to their peace and tranquility and their power to prescribe the qualifications of their own officers, the ten ure of their officers the manner of their election and the grounds on which the trib- unals before which and the mode in which such elections may be contested, should be exclusive and free from external interfer- ence except so far as plainly provided by the constitution of the United States where controversies over the election of state off, cers have reached the state courts in the manner provided and have been determined in accordance with the state constitutions and laws alike, the case must necessarily be rare in which the interference of this court can be properly invoked"
 The chief justice then reviewed the cases of Boyd vs. Thayer, Wilson vs North Car olina, Kennyard vs. Louisiana and Foster vs. Kansas etc.
 The grounds on which jurisdiction Is sought to be maintained in the present case are set forth in the errors assigned to the effect in substances:
 Il. That the action of the general assem- bly in the matter of these contests deprives plaintiff in error of their offices without due process of law.
 ''2. That the action of the general as- sembly 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.
 For more than 100 years the constitu- tion of Kentucky has provided that con- tested elections for governor and lieuten- ant-governor shall be determined by the general assembly. In 1799 by a committee to be selected from both houses of the general assembly and framed and regu- lated in such manner as shall be directed by law since 1850 by both houses of the general assembly according to such regula- tions may be established by law. The highest court of the state has often held and in the present case nas declared, that under their constitutional provisions the power of the general assembly to deter mine the result Is exclusive, and that it's decision is not open to judicial review. (Au- thorities quoted here.)
 The statute enacted for the purpose of carrying the provisions of the constitu- tion into effect has been in existence in substance since 1799, and many of the states have similar constitutional provis- ions and similar statutes.
 eve do not understand this statute to be objected to as in any manner obnoxious to constitutional legislation, but that plain tiff in error complains of the action of the general assembly under the statute, the judgment of the state courts declining to disturb that action"
 "1he court of appeals not only held that the office of governor or lieutenant goveren- or was not properly under the constitution of Kentucky, but moreover, that court was of the opinion that the decision of these contested elections did not deprive plaintiffs in error of any pre-existing right. Our sys- tenn of elections was unknown to the com- mon law and the whole subject is regulated by constitution and statues passed thereun- der.
 ''In view of the court of appeals the mode of contesting elections was part of the ma chinery and hence the rights of the officer who held the certificate of the state board of canvassers were provisional or tempor- ary until the determination of the result of the elections as provided in the constitu- tion and under that determination, if ad- verse to him, they ceased altogether. In fact the statue provided that when the in- cumbent was adJudged not to be entitled, his powers shall immediately cease, and un- der the constitution the holder of the cer- tificate manifestly held it for the time be- ing subject to the issue of a contest if in- itiated.
 court of appeals in declining to go behind tion and laws with the ultimate determina- tion of the right to these offices, denied no right secured by the fourteenth amend ment.
 "The commonwealth of Kentucky is in full possession of its faculties as mem- Der of the union and no exigency has arisen requiring the interference of the general government to enforce the guar antees of the constitution or to repel inva- sion or to put down domestic violence In