Durango semi-weekly herald. (Durango, Colo.) 1899-1907, 1905-07-10
CHIEF Jusricx oAssERrs oPiN.

BY the very able and clearly ex-
pressed opinion OF Chief Justice Cab
bert, She supreme court declared the
principle which lies ct the foundation
OF its action last fall in granting On
Injunction to restrain election officials
and others from committing gross
frauds and Otherwise violating the
law in the election held in November
II IL an epoch marking opinion
breaking as 1t were a new path and
applying principles which although
fundamental and essential to the full
exercise by the state OF its sovereign
powers. had previously been recog
nized only in a theoretical way. For
the hrst time in this state and prob
ably for the first time in any member
OF the American union, the right OF a
sovereign state to resort TO any rem
edy for the protection OF its citizens
received full recognition.
Ordinarily an injunction cannot be
Issued 10 prevent the commission OF
n crime. the punishment for which Il
specifically defined by law. In such
cases the law nas provided remedy
which presumably IL adequate. But
where the wrong threatened goes be-
You'd the simple commission OF q
crime and involves the destruction Of
vital popular rights the obligation vi
the state rs sovereign TO protect lis
citizens becomes paramount. 1t rises
above the obligation to punish a few
individuals who may commit crimes,
and involves the duty OF preventing
eyil-disposed and others from perpe-
tratipg great wrong upon the mass
Of citizens for which the punishment
of the criminals would AFFORD no true
redress.
This view OF the subject is present
ed so clearly and forcibly by Cniei
Justice Gabbert that We quote al
length from his opinion. as follows:
The state, in Its sovereign caps-
city, by the terms OF it's being. is en-
trusted with powers and duties TO be
exercised and discharged for the gen
eral welfare, and for the protection
OF the rights and liberties of It's citi.
ers and in the discharge OF these du.
ties, II is moi restricted in the rem.
edies which II may employ. The in
terest of the state in a pure election
is not limited TO the protection wnich
may be afforded b. the punishment
OF thoF. through criminal prosecu.
tons, who violate the laws relating
to elections by padding registration
lists, permitting repeating, and falsl.
fying election returns.
''If conspiracy of the magnitude
charged exists to commit frauds viola
tive Of the most sacred rights OF the
citizens OF the state, then any attempt
10 prosecute and convict the wrong
doors would be futile. If, then, the
state. In order TO secure an honest
election, should be limited TO the
prosecution and punishment OF those
WAC might be guilty OF the frauds
charged, the people Of this common
wealth are vi the mercy Of those whu
have combined to commit these
frauds.
Government is not such a failure
the state is not so impotent The re-.
suit to be accomplished by proceed
ing which the state may institute
rather than its character. constitutes
the test OF its power. II has the
right TO appeal TO this court for de
termination and exercise OF its pow
ers by IN appropriate process. to pre-
vent wrongs watch. in its sovereign
capacity. it is its duty to prevent
Certainly no good reason can be ad
vanced why il Is not AS wise for the
state, by means of civil action, to
ing its rights or the liberties OF its
citizens. AS It would be TO wait and
punish, or attempt to punish the oil.
fender Tor crime after it has been
committed.
''It is the undoubted duty OF the
ed. every channel through which
powers are exercised necessary for
the protection Of the rights and llber-
ties Of Its citizens. Deny this power
and the supremacy OF the state gov.
eminent is denied. The rights OF
citizens which Will be impaired IL the
frauds threatened are committed, are
of the most vital Importance. II moi
prevented, then the interests OF the
state. AZ well as the interests OF those
whom il is bound to protect, will be
inJurtously affected. The power
woich the state may exercise in such
circumstances is wholly Independent
of other remedies at law. II is the
function OF the attorney general. BY
information. To protect the rights OF
the public, and in so doing he has the
right TO resort TO tne more lenient
remedy OF injunction to prevent
wrongs against the public rather than
wait until after their commission, and
then seek TO punish the wrong-doers ="
An injunction issued under these
circumstances upon application OF the
state, resembles prerogative writ
under the common law watch was is
sued ut the command of the sovereign
and the right 10 the employment OF
which was unquestionable. An injunc-
ton OF this kind is An exercise OF
sovereign authority, the supreme
court forming that part of the state
rnyQrn in Wniph this nartinnIar