The Guthrie daily leader. [volume] (Guthrie, Okla.) 1893-1996, 1910-06-16
ENABLING ACT BINDING
Iudre Huston Overules Demurrer to
Temporary Injunction.

prohibiting plural marriages il was
protecting the morals Of the state
ID fixing the temporary capita, until
1918 and prohibiting an appropriation
for the permanent capital y was pro
tscging the people from the strife,
cuhfusion and turmoil and sectional
anItnosities Usually, II not invariably
Incident to state capital location
contest until after the new state gov
eminent was organized and put into
operation and other questions Of much
greater importance settled
uJscusses Repuda4cn.
Now, shall this purpose Of congress
be defeated? Can the solemn accep-
tahce BY ordinance irrevocable OF all
tie terms of the Enabling Act be re-
pudlated 4 do not believe It can
either legally or morally. Such re-
uudiatiOn must In the very nature OF
things result In the impairment OF the
credit and good name OF the state
There is nothing alleged in the pc
tition as to an election being held 70
locate the state capital. nor the resu.
thereof, although II was urged in the
arxumest that the court could not
know or guess as to the result That
is true, and neither could anyone else
officially hIIow as to the result until
Il is officially declared But II the
Enabling Act is valid. and hold II IS,
then there fl no question Of an cleo
tion to be considered. If the Enab-
ling Act Is valid, the capita OF the
state stIIl remains where it is fixed
by that act. and no person or per-
sons officials OK otherwise, have a
right to remove II or set up the seal
OF government elsewhere. 1t is al
legged that the defendant, the govern.
or. is about, or attempting 70 remove
1t, and this brings us TO the question
as to the Jurisdiction OF this court 70
restrain him from SO doing. 1t Is
true that the authorities are unani.
nous in declaring that the courts
can not in any way exercise any con
troll over the governor OF state IN
the exercise OF his governmental func-
tions wherein he Is vested with any
discretion az to whether he shall act
or how he shall act. or whether he
win act at all 1t is true also that
there Is a conflict In the authorities
as to the Jurisdiction OF court te
control by its process the acts Of
governor OF a state at all, some ol
them holding that he Is beyond The
reach Of the courts altogether, whilt
others hold that where his act Is
ministerial or where no discretion Il
lodged In him, then he can be control
ed by the court
Jurisdiction Of the Court.
It Is said that the three depart
Tnents OF government, the executive
the legislative and the judicial, arr
wholly independent OF each other
That is true in sense; each actinl
in It's own sphere Is independent o
each of the others In that sphere
but under our scheme OF governmen
1t Is intended that each In its owl
sphere may be a check upon tn
others. The legislative departmen
may within constitutional limits ad
70 or take from the powers and dutie
OF the various executive officers;
may also within the same limits reg'
late the judiciary, prescribe the jurii
diction of the various courts, estal
lsh rules OF evidence and OF pr'
cedure. The judicial department ma
intervene and declare an act OF III
legislature unconstitutional, Will
the executive may operate upon th
Others by the exercise OF the vel
N pardoning power. and thus is mai
timed that harmonious system I
checks and balances and distribute
OF power which it is believed be-
subseEves the needs of a free peopl
When a controversy arises as to VIII
Is the law, the courts must detefmif
It, and when it is so determined Il
executive department must enforce
and abide by 1t. AS / have sal
there is not entire harmony among u
decisions as to the power of eou
70 order ana direct the actions Of q
governor Of a state. but in each Ca
q court should follow these adjudic
49,. - = -.