The Guthrie daily leader. [volume] (Guthrie, Okla.) 1893-1996, 1910-07-29
Q 600 @ 10000 ccoo O 0 O Q 9
o COMMUNICATIONS o
q c
G o 100000 90 q O o q q q O .

ney General West must be, in the
light OF the decision Of The Supreme
ceurt OF the state on the capital case
yesterday, apparent TO the people.
Haskell has been asserting an the
time the nonblnding force OF the En-
ahling Act; West, while pretending
TO be friend OF CSiithrie, with tears
in his eyes, asserted alat the county
attorney had no authority TO bring
the action 10 test the binding force
of the Enabling Act Haskell has
spent six weeks in trying 70 keep the
state courts from deciding the main
capital question, thc binding force 0l
the Enabling Act, and about which
he asserted there was no question.
Had Haskell been sincere and sent
his attorney general into the district
court to test this principal question
about which he has been cock sure,
the supreme. court could yesterday
haze decided that question instead or
In the form Of the action which Has
Keil's attorney general, West, brought
j decided the only questions which 1t
could decide IN that case. and thai
was the county attorney or authorized
officer OF the Law had authority 10
| bring an action to enjoin the removal
of the state officers generally from
removing the capitat from the place
where II Is located by law, and to
bring al action 10 test the binding
force OF the Enabling Act, which Has
kell says can be ignored by the state
officers. Haskell says the decision
yesterday vindicates his position
4 Why did he not prove his belief by
sending his attorney general into the
| district court, the court that the SUI.
preme court has held had jurisdiction
to determine this question. Haskell
| has asserted and pressed this unnec-
essary, far-reaching and injurious, at
home and abroad state agitation upon
the principle that the governor had
the authority to determine the ques.
/ lion OF the location OF the state cap
/ ital as an executive question. The su-
4 preme court has again fully turned
him down and holds, as every body
! else knew must be SO II this Is coun
4 try of law, and ii Is, that ,ne loca
/ lion OF the state capital, under the
! law, is not an executive question,
but judicial question:; IL is not en-.
forcement of the law, but the inter
probation OF the Law.
The insincerity or lack of sound
ness of opinion ol bath these high
/ officers has been completely demon
strated in the nnansweable opinion
1 of the supreme court of yesterday.
/ me state of Oklahoma is exertemely
fortunate, in my judgment, indeed,
! it Is the saving clause OF our present
/ state government. that II has a court
I which can not be swevered from its
/ high duty OF correctly and exactly in
+ tel preting and directing the enfol ce.
ment OF the law. as II is written, by
any OF these side, petty, PERSONAL
/ splteful considerations that so much
.nilnence other officers.
The governor, in his statement this
morning. says that he will confei
/ With his attorneys and determine
what, IL any, further attention VIII be
paid to the cou. IS. We would suggest
10 him that so long as Oklahoma re
mains sovereign state OF the Union
ne and his attorneys anc attorney
general had better begin to recog nize
the principle that the governor of the
state will be held by the courts to
the same strict observance of the
Law as will the humblest citizens, fof
Il was written yesterday in wol ds
that will save this state from the dis
aster and destruction so many incon.
slderate people have voiced that ''he
and his acts are as much subJecS 70
the law as the humblest citizens oil
the commonwealth"
Guthrie, in the district court, in the
! Federal court and in this case In the
supreme court has all the time pre-
sented and urged the main question
is the Enabling Act binding?
Oklahoma City and the governor
and their attorneys have in each in
stance aud in each court, presented
some other technical questions or jul
isdiction questions or questions Oh
authority OF the county attorney or
1 the plaintiff to sue, in ordes to try
10 keep away from this question
Oklahoma City, in the campaign,
admitted the Enabling Act was bind
4 ing and said that the capital location
] bill did not violate that act for 1t did
not ask for the removal OF the capital
until 1913. Most of the voters were
decelged BY that statement. Guthrie
has tried to present the question OF
the binding force of the Enabling Act.
The governor excused himself for Is
4 suing the proclamation by stating that
/ the Enabling Act was not binding.
Why not. then, call this foolshness
and let that question be tested and
/ this unseemly scramble and attempt
F 10 epudiate the Enabling Act come
TO an end. and the questions involved
in the merits OF this controversy be
decided by the supreme court of the
state. Either the governor or the at
tofuey general can do this and let
the matter be determined in one-half
the time they have taken to keep
away from the question, If they are
sincere,
Yours tuly,