The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1931-05-26
6 PASSAGE
ARGUED BEFORE
SUPREME COURT
Fight to QuaSh Bus Law as
Illegal Brings Conflict
in Views.

mo court has the power to go
behind the signatures of legisla-
tive officers to question passage of
an act"
Courts do have such power and
can protect the legislators them
selves from the improper conduct
of their own officers"
These varying viewpoints were
among those advanced in the Indi-
ana supreme court today.
The case was an oral argument on
petition of Secretary of State Frank
Mayr Jr., to have the high court
issue writ Of prohibition which
would dissolve restraining order
in the House Bill case, and permit
in 1881 acts to be issued.
The issuance was enjoined by
Judge Harry o. Chamberlin in
Marion circuit court, where effort
is being made to prevent House
Bill 6 from becoming law.
The bill puts complete jurisdic-
ton over bus and truck lines in the
hands Of the public service COM
mission. 1t is being fought on the
ground that the enrolled act, as
signed by Governor Harry G. Les
lie, never had received final ap-
proval from the senate.
Circuit Court Held Powerless
Hugh Merrifield and Earl Stroup,
deputy encouragement, argued
the action for Mayr. They commended
that the Marion circuit court is
without jurisdiction. since publica-
ton of the acts is part of the Iegls-
lative function which can not be
interfered with by the courts under
the constitutional division of power.
Merrif1eld admitted, upon ques-
tioning from the bench, that under
this Interpretation the secretary of
state is acting as a legislative ana
not executive officer.
The writ was opposed by Edward
Knight and James Deery, attorneys
for the city of indianapolis; George
Rooms for the city of Muncie, and
Richard Ewbank, representing GER
tain citizens, all of whom are fight
ing House Bill 6.
Holds Passage Method Material
Ewbank commended the courts
have jurisdiction to go into the
method of passage of a bill, if it
can be proven that the measure
failed to fulfil the constitutional re-
quirements for passage.
Rooms contended that such juriS-
diction is necessary to protect the
legislators themselves.
Briefs are to be filed with the
court before the matter is decided.
Ewbank today also fled with the
circuit court an affidavit
from Walter Myers, speaker of the
setting out that he would
never have signed the bill except
that it was represented to have
been duly passed and enrolled.
The affidavit related Myers adj
vised Knight, Indianapolis corpora
ton counsel, to have a house mem
Der introduce a motion recalling the
bill from the Governor when he
(Myers) learned that it was not in
proper form as passed.
Would Write Emergency Clause
Senator Alenzo H. Lindley (Rep.
Vermilion and Warren)
expressed the opinion on visiting the
Statehouse that legislators with i'm
portant bill will protect themselves
in the future from such delays in
printing Of the acts by the use of
the emergency clause.
An emergency clause entities al
bill to become law upon signing by
the Governor. Otherwise, the acts
become statutes only when they
have been printed and distributed
by the secretary of state and a
proclamation declaring them in
force has been issued by the
Governor.