Show ARBITRARY POWER WE are am indebted to hon frank i lin hn S richards for a copy of the argument of hon james 0 broadhead before the supreme court in the ewe case of the late corporation of the church of jesus christ of lat ter day saints et al appellants va the united states the concluding declarations of this eminent lawyer upon the exercise of arbitrary power are so forceful clear and logical that we reproduce them it will be observed that so far as the personal property is concerned there is nothing in the act t of 1887 which assigns any reason or cause for declaring the corporation dissolved or for directing the supreme reme court of the territory 0 of atah utah to wind up its ite affairs an and set aside a portion of the real estate for the pur purposes posos named in the section of the act congress assumes that the act of 1862 has been violated and authorizes the attorney general to institute proceedings to forfeit and escheat to the united states property acquired in violation of the act of 1862 the proceeds to be disposed of by the secretary of the interior for the use of the common schools of the territory these schools axe are open to the children of people of all classes and denominations therefore this prop property ty donated by members of a religious body for certain specific purposes to Is to be seized anar ana diverted to other and different uses and for the benefit of persons who never contributed anything to it by the provisions of the section of the act the court is required red to effectuate the transfer of the title to real property now held and used by the corporation for places of worship al and parsonages personages nages connected therewith and burial grounds to trustees for the purposes mentioned in the law the first clause of this section declares the corporation to be dissolved and requires the attorn attorney e y gen eral to institute such proceed proceedings ings be fore the supreme courton court of the territory of utah as ass shall b all be pro proper pe r to execute the foregoing brov provisions ismons of w the section and to wind up tb the affairs of the corporation con conformably bayto to law to execute the fore going provision of the section to is td w decree decree that the corporation is dig als 1 solved th thia the act of congress requires the court to do and then to w wind up its affairs conformably to t law in pursuance of the broad prova ions of this section 17 the Sup reia 06 court of the territory at the instance of the attorney general seized upon all the property of tho tb corporation real and person personal si slid adf decreed a dissolution of the cornot cor pot tion thus executing in the langew langu ag of the act the provisions of this seo 7 ciolk on A receiver was appointed to ww and hold the property in the absence of any cause for such appointment such auch as usually gives authority t to courts to appoint receivers ce ivers the alleged dissolution of the corporation po ration and the assumption on the part of the court before any trial was had or investigation made before even an answer was filed filed to w the allegations of the bill authorized in the opinion 0 of f the court the government of the united states sites to seize and confiscate all al property gro property perty which might be found suc ch as cattle and sheep stocks and lairds ads houses temples and taber gables aules and authorized the court through rough its officers to take tak ke posses mon of all such property alt although ough it is alleged in the ball that certain persons named therein at the time or of the institution of the suit held such ch property in their possession as for the corporation the court in its decree specially finds abat oat all the real property described ln in theft the fl ridings anding a of odthe the court was at the time of the institution of the taw suit held in trust for the corpora these proceedings are by to say the least of them the act t of congress assumes that it not y has the power to disapprove the he act by which the corporation wag ss chartered but to declare that the property may be seized by the government officers without any evidence idenie that the corporation has allany any respect violated the provi on of its charter that it may be held eld in the hands of a receiver and nally distributed in such manner as s the court might think proper can such proceedings be justified austill ed except upon the ground that the government ment of the united states ta legislators its courts and their OfIl cers are not bound to leeard that stat PV provision ision of the fuDd fundamental W of all free governments that no gon on shall be deprived of life berty bercy or property without due aroe goleas of law jaw we think not ore ere is a judgment without a hear bear 1119 a seizure without a cause and all n escheat without the pretence predence pre tence of ay authority of law 1 I say that these are acts of arbit y power it has been said by a daisilu anguished jurist in this country th vaa at there flere are am two kinds of law in america one is the law which ranges comprising the acts of and the customs of cona com cities mi ties which change from time to time ane as public 1 exigencies may ma auire K tee the other is the law athly that j does es ut not change the law of the na which recognizes the doctrine thoa person shall be deprived of lafe e liberty or prope property without due process oceel of law that hat law is 11 and eternal it hu the authority of legislators it nute the jurisdiction of courts it stando the anos as a sentinel to guard against 01 a of arbitrary power over vi I 1 liberty everywhere pout this land nd over I 1 ous ona came I 1 whether from the bar ena at aun or from arom the for 4 0 f wrany Germany vr from the teach sa of greek hers of philosophers an Q waier er age it has found ft away here and in this country it has become the foundation stone of our political fabric if I 1 were asked to declare my opinion as to what was the origin of that doctrine I 1 should say it rather springs from that spirit of manhood implanted in the breast of every man who has stamped upon his brow the image of his maker make which enables him to say in th the face of arbitrary power 1 I am not your slave my rights are governed by b law and I 1 am authorized by b the bod god that made me to say that I 1 I 1 am not subject to your mere will or caprice what is the answer of arbitrary power the answer and the only answer that can be given is 1 I am stronger than thou that is the answer of the brute and the barbarian if indeed the brute could speak it does not belong to the teachings or practice of christian civilization and it will not be sanctioned by this exalted tribunal |