Arizona republican., 1912-07-16

cannot. As was said in recent Colorado case, if the courts can amend the constitution today. and in sert therein something that was never there. to sustain d law. they have equal authority to amend the consti- tuition to-morrow and strike there from something previously there to overthrow law. The sovereign people in whom is vested all govern mental power, have spoken in their organic law, and their mandate, so expressed. must be enforced. by the courts. even though wise and benefi- cial attempted legislation is thereby defeated
 People V Leady. 123 Pac.
 (Colo) S24.
 The peculiar value of d written constitution is that it places. in un- changing form, limitations upon leg islative action. unless amended by the people in the mode they have designated. thus giving permanence and stability to popular government which otherwise would be lacking. We adopt as our own the language 1 of one of the SOundest and most thor Ough thinkers and jursts who have 1 written on the subject of organic law embodied in our constitutions: The courts tread upon dangerous l ground when they venture to apply the rules which distinguish directory | and mandatory statutes to the pro- | visions of a constitution. Constitu- tions do not usually undertake to pre- i scribe mere rules or proceeding, eX- | cept when such rules are looked upon i as essential to the things to be done; and they must then be regarded in the light of limitation upon the power | to be exercised. It is the province oi an instrument of this solemn and permanent character to establish those fundamental maXims. and to fix /, those unvarying rules, by which all l the departments of government must at all times shape their conduct. We are not therefore. tC expect to find in a constitution pro visions which the people. in adopting lit. have not regarded as of high inn portance, and worthy to be embraced in our instrument which, for a time at least, is to control alike the gov lernment and the governed. and tC form a standard by which is to be
 
 ercised as well by the delegate as by the sovereign people themselves. Ii directions are given respecting the times or modes of proceeding ir which a power should be exercised there is at least a strong presump- tion that the people designed it should be eercised in that time and mode lonIy. And we impute to the people a want of due appreciation of the Ipurpose and proper province of sucf an instrument when we infer that Isuch directions are given to any other lend" Cooley. Const Linn. 9th Ed lp. IA
 As was said in Perry County V
 Railroad Company. 5S Ala. 556. We
 think the only safe rule for inter
 preting clauses of the constitution (which command certain things to b' done, or certain methods to be ob Iserved in the enactment of statutes lis to hold that when it is affirma lively shown by legal evidence tha
 in the attempt to Iegislate some man , date of the constitution has been dis regarded. such attempt never becomes , a law"
 Coleman V. Eutaw. 157 Ala 327 Opinion of Justices Suprem Court. Shepley 464;
 State " Jones 26 Ark 2S1 2S7 Varney " Justice S6 Ky 596;
 McPherson V Blacker. supra A constitution framed by a conven 2 ton after the most solemn and de . Iiberate consideration and ratified an s adopted by the people as their funda