The weekly chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Craig County, Okla.) 1905-1913, 1912-03-08

branches of government, and declared
that IT was a question of whether the
supreme court was to have its orders
carried out or thwarted by illegal inter
ference. He said that the governor
was directed by the constitution to
carry out the will of the people, of
course, he added, subject and subordi-
nate to law
'The case also presents the question
of whether the governor has the right
to become a military dictator in the
state suggested Justice Williams
from the bench.
Calls Governor Intermeddler.
when the governor issued his proc
lamation." continued Justice Stuart,
"canvassing the vote and declaring
the result at his executive function
was at an end; when one town con-
tests and the court takes original juris-
diction, the governor then become a
stranger to the controversy, and it is
tie judgment of the court to be en-
forced and not the ideas of the execu-
tive. The governor was an inter-
meddler at law"
"The adjutant general only moved
the records from one part of the town
to another, suggester Justice Hayes.
would it not be an interference with
an order of the county commissioners
and not of this court?"
Judge Stuart replied that everything
the governor did there was contrary
to law, contrary to government or the
theory behind it.
Absolutely subyersive of it," sug-
gested Judge Williams.
Your honor is correct" replied the
attorney. He added that to declare
on injury had been accomplished would
not soften the situation since it was
not involving the courts integrity; in
stead of a court being jealous in re-
leasing its judgment it should be ieal-
GUS to enforce it. Justice Williams
interrupted to say that under the law
when the military is called into ac-
ton it became a civil arm and that
it was never intended by the bill of
rights that the military arm should
be employed in any other way. Jus
tice Hayes said while he was not pass
ing upon the legality of what the gov
ernor did, he asked that since it was
an act against the county commission
ers, should not the matter be presented
to court below Judge Stuart an
swered that at no time did the COVER
nor have authority to enalrge upon the
courts order The court did not say
where in the town the court house
should be, but that the governor did.
Justice Hayes again stated that loca-
ton of the court house was a matter
with the county commissioners and
asked the attorney was not the gov
ernors action against the county com
missioners rather than against the SUI
preme court.
IF the governor was not acting iii.
der the courts judgment why did he
issue his proclamation based upon its
Judgment the attorney replied
Il have admiration for the adjutant
general" said Justice Williams, II
think he was acting in good faith. l
think that the governor was the us
upper"
Judge Stewart closed by declaring
that the case presented issues of
whether the court had right to make
orders and then see they are enforced
and that the time was ripe for de-
cision that would fix the line of de-
markation between the departments of
government Attorney General West
suggested that all had lost sight OF
the fact of who was on trial, it was
not matter of whether the governor
was wrong, but whether Adjutant Gen
eral Canton was guilty of contempt of
the supreme court in following the
order of his superior officer, who was
the governor He stated that in short
the adjutant general had to obey the
governor or be fired"
Refers to Order No. 1.
An officer should resign before he
iisobeys the law" suggested Justice
Williams.
That is true" replied the attorney
but there is nothing in the
proceeding to show that adiutant gen
sral knowingly disobeyed the law"
He continued by reference to "exe-
,utive military order No IT, under
which he said that as part of the
state National Guard, Canton had to
,bey.
"a soldier only has authority to-
AIRY out lawful order" said Justice
Williams. "If it is not lawful he obeys
It his PERIL
And he disobeys at his his peril,
hot back the attorney general.