New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1856-04-21
FROM MAINE.
THE REMOVAL OF JUDGE DAVIS.
respondenee Of The N Y. Tribune.

Correspondence Of The N Y. Tribune.
MAINE Monday, April II, 1856
For the past two OF three weeks some rare and un-
precedented proceedings have taken place in the Legs
lature Of this State and thinking that they are SUI
fcent in themselves to interest your readers thought
plain statement Of facts might be acceptable. The
proceedings to which | refer the taken
by the Legislature, and carried out by the Governor
for the removal of Judge Davis from the station he
now couples
year or little since act wac passed by the
Legislature which assembled during Gov. Morrlis
administration leaving il for the people TO determine
at the next election whether the Sherfs of the va
nous counties land some State oficers) should be
elected by Themselves the people, appointed by
the Governor and Council, as heretofore. The
amendments providing for the election Of Sheriff. &c.
by the people were adopted by considerable MAORI
ties, at the election in September Then the question
whether the Governor should appoint as before
until the time of election whether the old Sherfis
held their offices over until that period. Some took
the ground that those amendments were In force as
soon az the people decided and that consequently
the existing officers would be authorized 10 re-
tain their stations until election was held by
the people-the Governor, from whom the right of
appointment had been taken, having lost thereby
his power to remove. The party IN power asserted,
on the other hand, that the Governor possessed the
same powers as formerly until the time of election.
Eminent men were found on each side. Soon after
Gov. Wells Inauguration he proceeded to appoint and
commission sherfs. At the opening of term OF
court held in Portland the newyappOinted Sheriff tor
Cumberland County, Mr.. Emery, appeared, claiming
to be the proper officer fulfil the duties attendant
that office; while the old Sheriff. Mr.. Baker appointed
and duly commissioned by Gov Crosby aud not re-
moved but retained, by Gov. Morrill,, claimed the
same office that he had held all along. Thus the
question arose, which the legal officer! Judge
Davis was informed on the Saturday afternoon, pre-
vOus to the opening of the Court on Monday that
bia aetio ould ria for his
be prepared written opinion. Upon the opening OF
the Court ON Monday Emery and Baker both APP
appeared, claiming to be the legal Sheriffs. Mr. Emery
Gov Weiss appOintee,l appeared with abe counsel
TO sustain his claim; Mr.. Baker with none, we believe
The arguments of Emery's counsel were prOlx, to
which Judge Davis listened with great patience and
attentions after which he stated that he would rather
submit the question to the full bench, and hoped the
claimants could settle it among themselves, at least
until that time, when a decision could be obtained
from the full board of Judges. But Emerys counsel
nterpOsed, calling for the decision at that Tune and
virtually informed Judge Davis that 1t would be
lodging the question if decision were not rendered
The Judge said he wished to evade no question COM
ing properly before bin for his adjudication and also
aoverted TO his want of experience on the bench
and reDakng that there present members OF the
bar of more experience than himself invited any who
wished to examine and discuss the moOted point TO do
30. No Others speaking, the Judge proceeded to reB-
der his decision, orally and after having spoken at
some length, read the remaining part of his opinion,
which he had previously prepared. This was III favor
of Baker, the former officer.
Instead of submitting to Judge Davis's decisi0n,Q
taking measures TO carry up the question to the -
bench of Judges, Gov! Wells ordered his appOntes to
override and set aside the decision of the Judges, and
to take possession Of the jail and office by force and
arms Already four or five jas have been thus
broken OPEN and the aors furniture thrown into the
street Admitting that Judge Davis's decision was
wrong land that it had been set aside by the full
benc6 is that sufficient cause for removal 1t Is wei
known that Judges sometimes render &C. lions which
are not sustained by the full bench of Jr yet this
not regarded sufficient to remove them from othce
But here an attempt is made and successfully carried
ont 10 remove Judge for deciding as he thought
y;ohf flor his opponents admit he Conscientious in
the decision) before is kaown that he r0s acro0g
What think yon Of combined Democracy and Straight
Vb;ycer,, in Maine 2 NERITAs.