The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1913-09-24
THE sULZER sTRENUosITY.

| Some Of the moves made by Governor
Sulzer in the matter of his impeach-
ment would seem to have been i'll ad-
| that these efforts have been directed
to the special point of contesting the
legality Of the entire impeachment pro-
cedure
| The first defeat which Sulzer suf~
fered in the progress of the case was
when he undertook to impeach and re-
move from the trial court certain mem.
bers of thc Senate whom he recognized
as unalterably opposed to him. But
the Chief Justice Of the Court of APP
pcals very strongly and ably showed
that no court could assail itself or re-
move any of its members from partici
patiug in any trial before it; for if
this could be done, by the process of
elimination the accused might abso-
lutely destroy the court. The position
of the Chief Justice was supported by
unanimous vote, including both the
Senators and the Judges.
Again, as reported yesterday morn
ing, the court with practical nnanimity
overrulcd the motion Of Governor Sui
ger counsel TO dismiss the impeach-
ment proceedings. This was a more
direct challenge to the legality Of those
proceedings than was the first motion
upon which Governor Sulzer suf-
fcrcd defeat This motion to dis
miss the proceedings went direct.
ly TO the core of the whole matter. 1t
raised the whole issue. Sulzer has been
claiming that the impeachment pro
cedure against him was invalid for two
had no right to begin or try any i'm,
peachmcnt. since it was neither called
for such purpose, nor was impeachment
brought before it by the Governor. Sec
ondly, his contention was that only at
regular session of the legislature could
impeachment procedure he instituted
or proceeded with. This, indeed, was
the core Of the Sulzcr contention from
the first But the Judges Of the Ap.
pellate Court sitting with the Senate
in the trial of this impeachment, were
unanimous on the point that the extra
session Of the legislature, having been
convened, could proceed with impeach
meut if it saw fit to do so. There was
but one dissenting voice, that of Sen
ator from the Buffalo district.
These decisions clear. the air for the
trial proper. 1t was en-
tirely consistent and legally open to
Governor Sulzer sto raise these points:
in fact, he had TO raise them. But the
hopelessness Of raising them is abund-
antly shown by the overwhelming vote
of the court The validity of the court
as constituted was determined in the
decision of the first point raised by
Governor Sulzer. The legality of the
proceedings as begun has been estab
lished by the vote on the second point
raised against Governor Suzer. There
is nothing now for him to do but to
proceed with the trial Incidentally.
however, the vote of the court on the
second point raised puts into effect.
beyond all question, the provision of the
that when a Governor is i'm
peached he shall be succeeded ia office |
for the time being by the Lieutenant |
Governor. The decision OF this second |
point, therefore. not only brings Gov
ernor Sulzer direct 10 trial on the i'm |
peachment charges, but automatically
removes him from office as Governor,
and lnstalls Lieutenant fIoyornor C1r,n
as acting Governor during the impcach
ment trial.