Albuquerque weekly citizen. (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1891-19??, 1906-10-20

OF september g.
"Tho maxim thai uslcgated powers
can nor Dee delegated buD must be- ex-
erclsed by the person Or body on
whom it Is conferred. which s Invoke
cd in favor of the plaintiffs contcn-
lion. comes down from the common
law and has been much worn away
as appiied 30 legislative bodies. In lts
descent along the cufrcnr nf events
90 the present day If it was ever
taken literally IN that connection &c
long ago ceased 10 have that force
either in England or the United
states where legislative power has
been, by legislative bodies. hahltually
delegated TO municipalities for the
purposes Of local government. aud 90
portiuns Of the people themselves in
the shape of permission 20 accept or
/ reject local option laws. no-cailsd
/ I'm recent times the duties of loris.
/ lailve bodies have been go multiplied
| through the Increase of population
aud the much greater increase 10 the
volume and complexion OF modern af-
i fairs, that u has become more and
/ more iha practice of congress tho lo-
/ gislatures of the states and even the
/ quasi Legislative branches of the guy-
| ornlng bodies in large cities. to usc
outside agencies IN doing much oi
what they formerly did them solyra
Thus there are boards of health. with
power go make rules aud enforce pen
alties against those who break them
railroad commissioners with vast lo
uislativc powers. license commission
ers. harbor commissioners. polics
commissioners which with othcr sim.
ilnr bodies too numerous 10 mentor
now DO "a very large pnri of what wal
formerly done directly by the leg.s.
laturcs themselves. Tho congress o
the United States especially ia giypf
90 seeking relief by exercising iti
power E rough outside agencies
has long governed the city uf wash
iuglun through q commission. nud hni
created aud endowed with great pOw
lcrs the interstate commerce com
mission % habiiually. when in har
mony with the president commits q
him hy law portions of its own pow
crs for temporary purposes And suCI
transfers of power have been rec0g
nized as valid hy che HuLrume cuur
/ Of the United States and leading stat
courts iu numhgriess instances
"Field Vs. CuTk. ii3 q $. Report
$50.
kinney w. ZImplemaa. 90 Texa
/, sac.
Territory vs. Scott g Dak. 357.
People ys Reynolds Gilman
a "a Lewis Sutherland stat Cons
Secs So. so. 0l and 81
"ln State vs. lufdge, bt Wis ih
court says on This question
The true test and dietincun
I whether q power ia strictly leRislai
iye. ur whether g. 81 adminisrutly
and merely relates 90 The execution
, the statute law Is between the deli
cation uf power "a make ih- ia
, which necessarily Involves dlscr
iiOn as 10 what q shall Dee and con
/ feFring authority and discretion as
. ils execution to be- exercised und'
\ ana iu pursuance of the law T1
j irst can not he done t0 Tho latter d
r valid objection can be- made
4 THE apportinnment in question
y my opinion moots that test it iB nl
80 much a law as something done
execution Of lnf"
The court thon says that long az
\ quioacone hy the people. The e1ecu
i. irc and the legislature in the law "a
T, der which thla appurilQnment and p
i preceding one were made was eni. i.tlt
\ i0 great weight. and cites authOriti'
\ iu support Of that proportion 90
I. then proceeds.
\ "To what has been said ln favor
4 iia validity may we'll Boz added th
y lfs auihora exhibtcd great sagacl
4 n IMPOSING upon the governor q
u duty Of making an apporiiunmcui
n casa 0 should iail io DO 80.
10 The hickerihss ioalousies trlc
ID and sometimes frauds ui leE'alaiur
=. in making apporiionmenta az thc kli