Democratic Sentinel, Volume 10, Number 51, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 21 January 1887 — Page 1

The Democratic Sentinel.

VOLUME X,

THE DEMIMATIC SENTIdEL. X.* •JtMCCFATIC NKWSPAPMK rUILIBHED IVTRY FmIDaY, >T Jas. W. McEwbn ——— BATIS iP WBSCIXPTIDM. •aayaar >l» fl Htautb ’I *«waatk« *• A.dUvwrtiaiin.K R.xt«B. Qaa miibi. oaa year. Hl <* Mali aulaa*, *• •» Quartai • « W M Bghtb - - 10 K) Ten par e«ot. adi»4 to foregoing price if JkorUMment* are eet to occupy more than inurU column width fractional parts of a year at equitable rates msinus cards not exceeding 1 inch space, •0 • year; H for six months; fa far three Airings! notices and advertisements at established statute price. Beading notices, first publication 10 cents . Mno; cash publlcati an thereafter s cents a Ml.' Yearly advertisements may be changed wuartarly (once in three months) at the opion of the advertiser, free of extra charge. Advertieomente for persons not residents •f Jasper county, must be paid for in advance of first public vtion, when less than mm-quarter column in size; aud quarterly ■’ n advance' when larger.

Alfsid MtiCar, T. J, McCot B. L. Hollinssworts. A. M9COY & CO., BANKER £, (Succeikois to A. McCoy <t T. Thompson,) Rbnssei.aer. Ind. DO * fie; sral banking buslnise. Exchange bought and sold Certificates bearing interest it'sued Collections made on al.’ available point* Office same placs as old firm of McCoy & Thompson April 2,1886 WORDECAI F. CHILCOTE. Attorney-a.t-La.w \ ENSSELAEB. - - • " INDIANA f radices tin the Courts of Jasper and adoinlng counties. Makes colieetions a specialty- Office on north aide of Washington street, opposite Court House- trinl SIMON T. THOMPSON, DAVID J. THOM PHON Attorney-at-Law. Notary Public. THOMPSON & BROTHER. Rknsselaeb, - - Indiana Practice in all the Courts. ARION L. SPITLER, Collector and AbstractorWe pay j. trbcular attention to paying tax- , eellinj. and leasiag lands. v 2 ntß VT H. H. GRaHAM, ATTOkN EY-AT-LAW, Rebsi'Xlatr.lndiam a. Money to lean on loigtime at. low interest. Sept. 10,‘86. JAMES W. DOUTHIT, /’TjENEY'-'AT—LAW AND NOTARY PUBLIC, 3TOffl»s upstairs, in Mareever’s new .wilding. Rensselaer. Ind. EDWIN P. HAMMONO, ATTORN EY-AKL AW, Rbnsselaev, Ind. Over Makeever’s Bank. May 21. 1881. W WATSON, ATTOkNIY-AT-LAW UF" Office up Stairs, in Leopold's Bazav, <gp| RJCNSBELAIR ' IND. yy W. HARTSELL, M- D SOMCEOPAKHIC (PHYSICIAN A SURGEON. RENSSELAER, - - INDIANA, Diseases ft. OFFICE, in Makeever’s New Block. Residence at Makesver House. Jnllll, 1884. Ji H LOUGHRIDGE a Physician and Surgeon. Office in the new Leopold Block, second floac second door right-hand side of hall: Ten per cent, interest will be added to ali accounts running unsettled longer than three months. vlnl DR. I. B. WASHBURN, Physician & Surgeon, Rensielaer, Ind. Calle promptly attended. Will give special atten tien to the treatment of Chronic Diseases. CITIZENS* BANK, RENSSELAER, IND., h‘. 8, Dwieema, F. J, Sears, hi. Ssia. President. Vic-President. Cashier DOBM A GENFRAL BANKING BUifWii: Csnifiestes bearing Intsrsrt issn-d; BxciKere bongbt tad sold; Mea«yloaned «-i fkrm» r lewsst rales and o> **s Jftvorable terms. •Ajsril IBM .

RENSSELAER. JASPER COUNTY, INDIANA. FRIDAY JANUARY 21* 1887.

CASTORIA

ear Infants and Children. M oaMaateissownnadaoedtsAadMa«Mrt I CasMala earea OoHe. CUatfpMina. inwoto aaa." H. A. Ama, M. > M I •*“>• •“* P”"*- 0 * 1 " 1 * KlataMimmWM.Y. I . Taa Ctoum Cowan, 1« Mtsa Mn< M. Y.

SkW®Ba®sO®ii® S) --DEALERS IN— A Hardware nwari? STOVES (>t al] styles and prices, for tsfc ■! Waod or Coal; ■HUH MACHINERY, Field a»o garden! ®Bli® SEEDS, &•.< &c., Ac., &e., &c. B u tL< je »pcr», liwirs and Binders, Deering Reapers, Mowers and Binders, Walter A. Wood Rearers. Mowers and Binders, Grand Detour Company’s Plows. Cassady Plows. Farmers’.Friend Corn Planters. C iquillard Wagons. Bast Wire Fencing, etc. Side Washington Street, REWSSELABR. - - INDIANA

The “Old Reliable 1 ’ is under the management of Norm. Warner A Sons. They keep constantly on hand an extensive stock of stoves, in great variety, hardware, agricultural implements, etc. They know when, where and how to buy, and put their goods on the market at bottom prices. An End to Bone Scraping. Edward Shepherd,of Hrrisburg, 111, says: ‘Having received sc much benefit from Electric Bitters, I feel it my duty to let suffering humanity it. Have had a running sore on my leg for eight years; my doctors told me 1 would have to have the bone scraped or leg amputated. I used, instead, three bottlos ot Electric Bitters and seyen boxes Bucklen’s Arnica Salve and my leg is now sound and well,’* Electric Bitters are sold at fifty cents a bottle, and Buckin s Arnica Salve a 25. per bo ) > 34Examine quality and ascertain prices of overcoats at Elsner’s, xou will buy. A large and well selected stock of School Suits for Boys, stylish, handsome, cheap and durable, just received at Ralph Fendig’s.

SMITH VICTORIOUS.

Robertson Enjoined by Judge Ayres, of the Circuit Court. The court said: This is a proceeding in the nature of quo warranto with an ap? plication for a temporary injunction pendente lite. The questions that arise in this case now are those that invariably come up in determining whether a temporary injunction should be granted. The defendant raises firs* the question of jurisdiction. It is contended that this action must be brought in the county w ere the defendant resides, and can not be brought in this county. Although the question is n?t free from doubt, I still thinkjthat the action may rightfully be brought in this county, where the alleged usurpation or attempted usurpation of the franchise of office occurs, * * * It seems to me that it is meant by the statute that the prosecuting attorney, in the discharge of his duties to the public, should take notice of any neur-

pation ot office or any unlawful holding or exercising the duties thereof in the county or counties in which he is prosecutor. Ido not think that the prosecutor was expected to take notice of usurpations of office in counties other than those m which he is prosecutor. For example, if some person whose place of residence was in Allen county should intrude himself into or usurp one of the county offices JJf Marion county, would it be expected that the prosecutor of Allen, rather than the prosecutor of Marion county, should take notice of such usurpation? I think not. I think the county where the tranebise of office is being usurped is the proper one, and 1 shall therefore adhere to my ruling against the defend tut on the question of jurisdiction. It is further contended that as the constitution provides that all contested elections for governor and lieutenant governor shall be determined by the general assembly in such manner as may be prescribed by law, that, therefore, no court has any jurisdiction to determine whether or not a lieutenant governor has been legally lected. As the constitution is not selfexecuting; the general assembly can try or determine contested elections only in the manner and in the particular kind of a proceeding that is prescribed bylaw, and only for the causes mentioned and specified in that particulai proceeding. Section 4,756 of the revised statutes in specifying causes for which an election may be conteste- provide no ground whatever for trying such a question as is presented here; namely, whether the election held was held at a time wnen it might lawfully be hell. If the court's therefore nave no authority to determine whether or not the election in controversy could legally have been held, there is no way to determine it. I think it does not follow that because tMe general assembly is authorized to try and determine contested elections, that therefore the courts have no authority to determine the title to an office in some other proceeding other than a contested election. But this proceeding is not a contest of an election as I think such as is provided for. While every contested election involves the title to an office, it does not follow that every proceeding to determine the title to an office is a contested election; this proceeding is not a contest to determine a contest between two persons; to determine which of them was elected where an election was held; but is one to determine whether there was any election at such a time as is recognized and provided for by law. I. do not think, therefore, that this is a contested election of which the general assembly has the exclusive jurisdiction to try But Ido think that the question presented is one of law, which the courts have the right to decide.

it is contended that the-defend-ant is entitled to have this procedure for an injunction continued, because the statute provides where either party is a member of the general assembly or lieutenant governor that, on the application of either party, the case should be continued until the expiration of the session of the general assembly. But this is an application for a temporary injunction to protect the rights of parties pending litigation ; to preserve the statu quo, and I think, therefore, that if a proper showing is made for a temporary injunction, that this statute could nave no application. The allegations of the’complaint as to the alleged usurpation on the part of defendant are somewhat contradictory. It is charged that the relator was duly elected president of the senate and is in "possession us the franchise of presiding over that body, br.t that the defendant has unlawfully intruded 1 himself into the officej of lieuten--1 ant governor and usurped some of his rights, and is threatening to and will, unless enjoined, usurp 1 the rights and duti » of president of th 1 senate. The defendant ad-

mits that he was declared elected to the office of lieutenant governor; that he did preside over the house and nineteen senators as a joint con ention and that he proposes to again preside over the joint convention when it meets for the purpose of electing a United States senator, but denies that he intends to use any force to obtain possession of the presiding office of the senate or the joint convention.

r As I look at it, therefore, it is necessary to pass upon the main question as alleged in the coinplaint—to determine whether, according to the allegations of the complaint, there is any usurpation. To determine this it is necessary to decide whether upon the facts alleged, the election specified was a valid one and whether such election oould legally have been holden. The constitution provides for the election of a governor and lieutenant governor at the same time, and provides that their term of office shall be for four years; and provides that the official term °f governor wed lieutenant governor shall commence on the second Monday in January, 1853, and'on the same day every four years thereafter, and further provides in case of the death or removal from office of the governor that the duties of th» office shall devolve on th®, lieutenant governor, and provides further that the general assembly ,shall provide by law for the case of removal from office, death,resignation or inability, both of the governor and lieutenant governor, declaring what officer shall then act as governor. There is no provision in the constitution for the election of a governor or lieutenant governo. to fill an unexpired term in that office, but simply providing for some one to succeed to the discharge of the duties of the office until a governor be regularly elected. The constitution provides that he shall be elected for a particular term, beginning at a specified time and to last for a period of four years. It does not provide for his election for any shorter period, and for these reasons, without attempting to give any additional reasons, that the eminent counsel of the plaintiff have stated in the argument, I think that no election could legally have been held at the time specified in the petition for the election of a lieutenan governor, and that, therefore, the defendant. according to the allegations of the petition, was not legally elected.

Under the allegations of the petitions of the relator, Smith, was elected president of thd senate, and had the right to preside, and therefore the defendant could not rightfully take from him or exercise any of the functions of the presiding officer of the senate, and if he did he w r ould, with-n the meaning of the statute, be usurping or unlawfully exercising such right or function. It is claimed by counsel for defendant that he is de facto at least the lieutenant governor, and that therefore, as a de facto officer, he can not be enjoined from discharging the duties thereof. It is undoubtedly the law that ordinarily a de facto public officer can not be enjoined from discharging the duties of the office. The reason is clearly stated. It will be observed . that the reason is not 1 ecause the court has no right to restrain him, but because public interest requires that the duties of his office shall be exercised by some one.—Ordinarily, the duties or functions that pertain to a particular office can be discharged by the holder of that office only, a#d if that office is vacant, or the holder of the office is enjoined, there is no other officer who can serve the public in discharging any of the duties of his office. In this case, however, so far as presiding over the senate i® concerned, that principle does not apply, because xhe president of the senate presides, and the public does not suffer for the want of some officer tot discharge such du ties.

[Concluded on 4th page.]

NUMBXR 51