The Daily Ardmoreite. [volume] (Ardmore, Okla.) 1893-current, 1910-05-20
WILL GOVERNOR
Be MANOAMUSEO
IN FIGHT FOR ELECTION ON PRO.
HleITlON TWENTY-ONE YEAR
CLAUSE, THE ARGUMENT.

Oklahoma city. May ia legal
battle of giants, with the governor of
the state one contestant and the state
supreme court the other. may arise out
Of the much disputed matter Of calling
an election on the prohibition ques-
tion.
) The immediate cause for battle
should such come about, is occasion.
ed by constitutional question of
long stanting-may mandamus be is
sued against the governor Of a state?
Governor Hlaskolrs stand on the
matter OF calling an election on the
prohibition question was outlined in
statement from him sometime ago
saying that he would call such an
election only after a court had decided
its constitutionality
The question of constitut.onality
arises because of the clause in the
enabling act OF the state constitution,
fixing prohibition in oklahoma for y
years
The governors attitude in refusing
to call an election until the constitu.
tional question is settled at the time
of that refusal. left the burden of
proof IN the hands Of the ones who
had initiated the petition. The gov
with the subject further. The petit
tion was presented to the secretary OF
state. But. as proyidet by law, with
out the witnessing of the governor of
the detachment of the names of the
/ petition, the filing could not be legal.
] Baked for a time the ones behind
the petition applied for papers OF man
damus against the secretary of state,
requiring him to file the petition. In
his answer to the supreme courts de-
cision on this matter the plea that in
view of the 2l years clause, any ac.
tion toward an election on the ques-
tion in point would be unconstitution-
al was made.
But last week, in the final decision
of the supreme court on the applica-
ton for mandamus, one was granted
on the grounds that the supreme
court, having no authority To stop leg
islation, had no right to pass on the
constitutionality of matter brought
forth by initiation until IL had become
subject for such decision by being
voted ON officially, In other words,
until the prohibition question, initiated
through the petition, has been put to
the people voted on, and passed. or
rejected. the supreme court could not
decide on its merits, for in deciding it
might act in way that would place a
block before the ministerial power of
the department known as the execu.
tive.
As a result of this, the mand anus
was granted. \ re-hearing was ap-
piled for. should this application be
granted, then the constitutional issue
might yet be- tested Should it not be
granted, then the condition of a petit
tiOn, duly filed, awaiting the minister.
p ial act Of the governor, the calling of
would arise.
But the stand of the governor, al
ready taken, says that no election will
be called until the matter of consti-
tutionality has been settled. Ii has
not been settled. should the governor
stand firm. then, until force should be
brought to bear. Notwithstanding the
duly filed petition there would be no
calling of election. What then would
be- the means OF force? Mandamus.
Here enters the battle above men
toned Can any one maudamus the
governor of the state?. Legal prece-
dent. with but few exception, says no
Which is greater, the supreme court,
or the governor This is the question
that promises ultimately TO result fr,m
The much debated matter of the pro.
posed resubmission of prohibition.
The supreme court simply has not
considered at all the question that is
fundamental in the prohibition matter,
that Of constitutionality," said George
ID. Conger. superintendent of the State
Auti-Saloon League, Monday, should
the course outlined by the decision
last week be followed, an election
might be conducted at the expense of
about 100000, only for the state to
ind that it had voted on question
that was unconstitutional at the
start. Continued refusal of the GOV,
ornor, however to call an election un-
iii the constitutional matter is decid-
ed should bring decision on that
point some whore along the line, even,
II in his defense against possible
mandamus against him, the right of
the United States involved in the en-
abling act, should arise, the question