The commonwealth. (Greenwood, Miss.) 1896-1923, 1906-01-26
EXTRACTS FROM SUPREME
COURTS DECISION.

EXTRACTS FROM SUPREM f
COURTS DECISION.
The following extracts from the
decision delivered by Justice S. S.
Calhoon in the Sandy Bayou injunc-
ton suit very clearly demonstrate
that there is a limit to the Cover
nor's authority:
In view Of the authorities, and
Of the fact that we have a written
constitution undertaking TO define
powers, and in view of the spirit
and genius Of the government Of
these States Of the American Union.
we utterly repudiate any suggestion
Of any power in the Governor or any
other officer, over and above the
constitution. We say, too, that if
the power sought to be exercised
here could be thought a matter of
doubt, even, it must be decided that
it does not exist. No court has ever
deviated from the position Of reject
ing powers claimed which are
doubtful. The constitutional or
statutory grant must be plain. The
whole people are vitality concerned
in this principle, as much so as in
that very mudsill of republics that
the three departments must be kept
inyioIabIy co-equal and independent
each Of the other,
mo argument can be based on
the evils which might result if the
Attorney General refuses to proceed.
If this be a hiatus in the law, so be
t until the Legislature shall see fit
act. Better the hiatus than the
destruction of a great and essential
II inciple, from which it is an easy
cap to the %crunching Of the bones
u the constitution.
But there is no trouble. 1t is a
simple matter to bring this question
lere right. Until it is so brought =
the people, sitting as this t
tribunal, it should not be consider d
ID any more than if it were between
Individuals. No court ever consid- {
red the merits Of any cause after {
that there was no right to q
ne. Judges do not sit as moot +
ourts to hear academic disputation, &
n the decision of which their con
lusions would be mere obiter dicta q
nd without force. Nor must they
ield and decide because the public
nay want a speedy decision. These
ialls are %imperviously padded to t
clamor, the howls of mobs
nd the storms Of political factions.
IF there could be any foundation
II the argument that the power to
he was inherent in the mere office
I Governor at common law, as in
case, possibly, Of the Attorney :
General, which we deny, still a new =
rder of things clearly appears in I
le constitution of Mississippi, I
'hich devotes many sections in Art. ]
Of the constitution to defining ex- 1
powers. There is no break
l the authorities that, when there a
an undertaking to set forth pow IL
rs, all must be presumed to be in Ii
and that the charter only =
an be looked to, with its necessary
Implications, for the limit of author =
~. There can be no inherent pow r
r to sue unless in the Attorney +
teneral, even if in him, without a
Il
"On careful examination it will a
e found that not one Of the cases .
tied by the counsel, or in the dis I
ent Of the Chief Justice, sustains, d
ven remotely, the contention of the ,
ppellee. The only thing they find q
that way is the dissenting !
Of a Judge in a Louisiana '
ase, and he cites no authority and
hows no investigation of the ques- E
but makes merely a tentative e
digestion, No constitution of any t
the forty-fve States gives the Tx -
2utiye the power to ignore the p
.ttorney General, the common law :
and sue at his own will in 9
ne State courts. None ever will.
20 State legislature has ever done |
None ever will"