The Lancaster gazette. (Lancaster, Ohio) 1846-1852, 1849-11-23
The Hamilton county Matter.

gret this, as the importance of the case
must interest them in anything relating
to it.
We might let the case rest here, with
the opinion ofthe Court and the dissent
ing opinion Of Judge Safin-giviug the
Clerk whatever advantage there may be
in controversy between a President
Judge and one ofhis Associates-Gr the
cloud Of smoke raised by the former in
attempting to conceal the material points
in The case will contrast unfavorably with
the clear aud emphatic declarations of
Judge Satin, who evidently speaks his
deliberalelyformed opinions wilhoutfear,
favor or affection; but as we have not
room for the Bill and Answer, we will
add in this article, short abstract of the
entire proceedings.
The material allegations in the Bill
are, that the compainants received a
majority ofthe votes cast in the first Dis.
trict Of Hamilton county, that they de-
maDded their certificates Of election, and
that the Clerk refused TO give them.
The material allegations in the answer Of
the Clerk are, that lie does not recognize
any other district than that of the entire
county, that the law dividing The county
into two districts is unconstitutional, and
that the compainanis did not receive a
majority Of the votes cast in the county,
Were we to draw up bill Of excep-
lions to the opinion of the court, we
should mention several errors:
In the first instance the Court erred in
saying that they had not jurisdiction in
the case. While the Clerk is creature
Of the Constitution. he is also a creature
of the Court. The Court appoints him
and the Court may remove him upon
good cause shown. He is appointed not
only 10 perform the duties devulving up
on him directly as Clerk Of the Court, but
also to perform tho duties enjoined upon
him, as Clerk, by the law. There is no
other person authorized TO perform this
latter class Of duties, and if The Clerk
neglecls or refuses TO perform them, it il
the duty of the power appointing him Ia
remove him. There is no doubt whatever
but that, as The Court remarks, the bust.
ness uf the Conit could be transacted
whether any persons were married OF
mol, any pedlar's license issued or mem.
Der elect certified; but is it right and
proper that the Court should tolerate o
Clerk, who refuses to perform these du.
ties, either wilfully or negligenllyl lii
said That there is another remedy--a civi
action may be brought against the Clerk
True. but there ought to be, and is, {
speedier remedy. Instead of waiting
the slow process of such an action, the
power, that placed such a person in Of
fee, should remove him and make room
for better.
The Court erred in deciding that, in
this case, the Clerk acted judicialIy.-
The law Of the State expressly declares
that he shall not decide upon the validi.
ty Of the returns, He is merely to Issue
his certificate lu the person having the
highest number of votes, under The de
cIared and published law Of the State.
The Codrt erred egregiousy in say.
ing that they hud no proof before them
of the "misbehavior" Of the Clerk. Hi,
own answer is the strongest evidence oI
his corruption; aud whatever the tender
heart of s0me of the counsel may have
led them to admit, the fact was upon re-
cord. before tho Court, that The CLERK
had decided upon the constiluIionally oI
tho apportiunment law aud had, so fal
as his act was concerned, rendered il a nul
lily. He ndmits that the RelatOrs had q
majority Of the legal votes in the first dis
trict of Hamilton county. he admits tha
he refused them their certificates Of elec
ton, thus wLfnIiy and knOwingiy violat
ing statute of tho State, which, so fu
as he is concerned, he is as much bount
to obey as ho is the commands of tn,
Court, under which he holds his office
From what we eau gather from tho in
struc,ions Of the learned Judge, the
Court consider tho law constitutional
we are ulso made to understand that
even in this cluss of duties. a wilrul anl
corrupt act, upon Tho part Of tho Clerk
. would be punished by removal, Yet tn
y Court refuses to act in this matter, wEel
n the Clerk admits that, to certify three q
;. his parizan friends to the Legislature, h
has violated the statute law of the State
If tho violation of law is not deemed
= "miSbehavior" by the Court, a Clerk
. certainly, secure in his situation. for W
h know ofno higher breach of duty he eoul
commit, unless it would be to writ