The Detroit times. [volume] (Detroit, Mich.) 1903-1920, 1911-06-29
DIVER OF PEOPLE
ITO USE RECALL
/ IS UPHELD
nprsms Court Of Texas Declares
Law Which Gives Authority To
Voters To Gust aUndesirables'
Il Constitutional.
Decision L Result Of Years struggl,
Between People Of Dallas and
Machine" Politicians.

DALLAS, Tex. June 29.-The init
alive, referendum and recall are held
constitutional In q sweeping opinion
by the supreme court OF Texas.
The court emphatically declares
that:
These three peoples power
measures are not In conflict with the
constitution Of the United States.
They are not against Republican
principles OF government.
Courts have no power to overrule
or modify such laws.
An elective officer has no more
claim on his Job than the employe of
IN Individual, and may be fred at will
BY his employers-the people.
Chief Justice T.. j. Brown and As
sociate Justice w. T.. Ramsey filed
the opinion. Associate Justice j. b.
Dibrell dissented. He was recently
appointed to the supreme court by
Gov. O. b. Colquitt, reactionary bit
terly opposed to the initiative, refer
endum and recall.
The decision IL the result OF a
years struggle between the people of
Dallas and vested interest politicians.
Dallas, dissatisfied with two mem
bers Of its school board. exercised the
recall provision of It's charter and
fred them, electing new members.
These were pledged to investigate
charges against Superintendent OF
Schools Arthur Lefevre.
They tried TO, but were blocked BY
other board members. The people,
again incensed, put through another
recall election, kicking out four more
board members. By that time Le-
fevre's term was practically up and
the reconstructed board named new
superintendent.
Politicians aching to test the recall
induced Lefevre 70 seek an injunction,
restraining the newly elected board
members from taking ofice. A
similar case was begun by one Of the
busted members.
Their attorneys argued that an cleo
tive oficer has vested right In his
ofaces and cannot be removed except
by court procedure. They asserted
that the recall was repugnant to the
Republican form of government and
\ IN conflict with Art. w, Sec 4 OF the
federal constitution, which provides
that the United States shall guarantee
70 every state Republican form OF
government
Judge Kenneth Force denied the In
junction. He was sustained by the
civil court OF appeals and now by
the supreme court. In these words:
The policy OF reserving TO the peo-
pie such power as the recall, the Until
alive and referendum, Is question
for the people themselves In framing
the government or for the Legislature
IN the creation Of municipal govern
ments. II IL not for the courts TO de-
eide that question. We are unable to
+ PEE from our viewpoint how IL can
b that al anger measure Of sovereign
" committed to the people by this
method of government and q more
certain means Of securing a proper
representation In any way initiates
aGainst tn character az a Republi-
con form Of government, and that Il
+ n thereby rendered In any sense OBJ
noxious TO the provisions OF the con
otitution Of the United States"
Gov. o. b. Coiquitt has repeatedly
opposed peoples power measures In
Texas and the courts ruling In regard.
- as q direct slap at his recent &C.
ton In vetoing bill giving the city,
o. Texarkana a charter with the re-
call provision.