The Guthrie daily leader. [volume] (Guthrie, Okla.) 1893-1996, 1910-11-15


state that part OF said act insisted
on and that the same is still in force
as law, unless repealed by the nitiat-
ed bill II will4not do 10 say that by
thus adopting said provision, the
capital OF the state shall temporarily
be at the city of Guthrie and
shall not be changed theTefrom prior
TO 1913, the right to change 1t prior
thereto by act of the legislature was
taken away from the state for the
reason that by the act Of admission
congress was charged VITA lnowl-
edge that the enabling act had been
compiled with and by sec 1 Of the
bill OF rights which reads:
"All political power Is inherent in
the people, and government Is insti-
tuted for their protection, security.
and benefit, and to promote their gen
eral welfare. and tacy have the right
to alter or reform the same when
ever the public good may require ~
| Provided, such change be not repug'
nant to the constitution OF the Unit
ed States that the people of the
state expressly reserved the right 70
repeal said law whenever the public
good required II, and for the further
reason that upon the admission OF
the state II became possessed Of all
the rights Of dominion and sovereign
ty which belonged to the original
states and stands upon an equal foot
ling with them In all respects wnat
ever. II congress Intended, by requir
ing that said provision ne adopted by
ordinance irrev0cable, 10 fasten upoI
/ this state an irrepealable law, con
gress exceeded It's powers. The ides
| that this state Us admitted into the
i Union thus debarred, while another
state Is admitted with the privilege
Of repeating IT'S laws to conform tC
tle wishes OF It's people, Is so repug
nant TO equality under the constitu
! ton that we cannot believe congress
intended It. But II 1t did and by sale
act and ordinance irrevocable an at
tempt was made to fasten upon th'
state law irrepealable before 1915
such an attempt is Intellectual.
Missouri State Capital Case
4 Edwards vs. Jesueur, 1872 Mo. 4lO
was suit by plaintl as a property
owner OF Jefferson City to restrail
the secretary of state from submit
ting to vote of the electors of th'
state n proposal passed by the gener
al assembly for amending the con
stltution so as to provide therein TO
the removal of the seat of govern
ment from the city of Jefferson L
the city OF Sedalia. The petition
charged that by the act of congress
admitting the state into the Union
the action of the Convention calle'
, pursuant thereto and subsequent leg
islation of the state In conformt'
Herewith, the seat OF government
was established at Jefferson City an'
could not be removed tnerefrom with
out the consent of the United States
The control of the United State
over the location of the capital va
based on Section OF the enabling
Act. providing. in effect, that certail
propositions were thereby offered I,
/, the convention of the Territory o
Missouri when formed for their lre
acceptance or rejection, which, II aC
oopted by the convention, shall b.
obligatory upon the United States.
! The four,n proposition granite
four sections of land to the state 10
the purpose OF fixing their seat o
/ government thereon. All the propc
sitions were upon the condition tina
the convention saould provide by al
ordinance irrevocable without tn
consent Of the United States, tha
every and each tract of land sold b.
! The United States. from and after th
first day of January next shall remail
exempt from any tax laid by orde
I or under authority of the state TIL
Z convention accepted the terms of ad
. mission and declared that this ol
dinance shall be irrevocable withou
the consent of the United States.
Pursuant TO the constitution the
adopted the legislature appointe'
commissioners who selected land NJ
on which jefferson City was located
lots were sold by the state and tn
seat OF government located there
Among the contentious urged wa
= that the state had thus become irro
vocably bound to maintain its sea
of government at said city unless b.
the consent OF the United States. Th'
could held not so and said.
But neither the convention nor IL
! Legislature had power in this respec
to irrevocably bind the people OF th'
state The right of the people L
establish and remove their seat o
! government at pleasure involves
governmental subject about whicl
there can be no irrepealable law
And reversed the Judgment of th'
trial court granting the writ
Contract And State Sovereignty
If il did. then can be said of th'
United States in this case as wa.
said by the court in Armstrong et al
VS. Board OF County Commissioner
CT Dearborn County I Blaekf 2OS
where substantially the same conten
ton was made by appellants who
claimed vested right in the location
of O county seat by virtue of certail
legislation forever locating it at l
certain point:
III the claim be available, I
clothes the appellants with power o
lcontrolling the general policy OF th'
state, the right OF the people OF tha
fOunil. and the administration of jus
tice In H. The state itself is strip
lred OF one OF the inherent and essen
4 lial attributes of l sovereignty th'
over 10 eercise which, the cour
leai 10 be Il power incident to SOY
ereignty and accured by the consti
LlIlan PM assnnino TINT hy adnnI