The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1912-02-22

The L. S. Supreme Court has thrown
out the "fad' eases as not jnsticiable.
The provisions of the Federal constItu-
brought. arc contained in Section 4,
Article ", as follows:
The United states shall guarantee to
every State in this Union Republican
Form OF Government. and shall protect
Application Of the Legislature. or OF the
Executive (when the Legislature cannot
be convened) against domestic Violence.
A sweeping, comprehensive provision,
truly, but entirely silent as TO the
means whereby the United States Shall
enforce the guarantee to every State of
a republican form OF government. The
Interpretation Of the court of last re-
sort is that Congress must meet this re-
auiremept of the constitution. Just how
Congress is to be approached in order
to secure this guarantee In case of
failure of a republican form Of gov
ernment in any State, is still in the
dark. Analogy might suggest, perhaps,
that the United States is to act on ap
plication Of the legislature or of the
executive when the legislature cannot
be convened. But if both legislature
and governor are in accord in support
| ing what may be claimed to be de-
psrture from republican form of gov
ernment. then it is plain case that
no remedy is possible, and the State
| is allowed to do as il sees fit through
its regularly constituted organization.
In the present case, the initiative and
referendum were attacked. Ii was held
in the principal case that tax had
been imposed upon the Pacific States
Telephone 6 Telegraph Company in &C.
cordance with a popular vote, in place
of being imposed through the repre-.
sentatives of the people as republican
form of government, strictly construed
would require. The Supreme Court, how
ever. finds no merit in the contention
first, because no substantial grievance
is alleged The liability of the company
10 tax is not disputed. 1t is not claimed
that the tax is coniscatory or out of
line with like taxation in the State
on other companies, or unduly op.
pressive. Therefore. there is no sub.
stantial reason for bringing the suit;
and, since the state has decided to have
the initiative and referendum. the only
power competent 10 challenge the right
OF the State 10 have these method:
: would appear 70 be the State itself.
. TO be sure, there is the possibility OF
action without any call from the State
: as when President Cleveland intcrferec
r in the great railroad strike in Montana
under the inherent power OF the ma
tion 10 have its mails transmitted un
disturbed and whore ne interfered IL
Chicago. not only without call from
the State OF Illinois. but in direct OF
: position TO the protest against his in
terference made by Governor Altgeld
! So that. bv precedent, the power TO in
terfere whenever in his Judgment tn,
section above quoted is violated =
n far as interference with the transmits
sion of l. :. mails is concerned. or tn
protection Of state against domesti
y violence is involved. inheTcs in th
Presidential office. Possibly in emergen
S cies this power might be exercised i
n other directions.
$ No progress whatever was mad,
= therefosr. by the bringing of thes
q suits: but the Suprcue Court Icf, sti