Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1856-04-11

whi'h he also WISHED il hc put upon iher'-
cords OF the senate.
Av,wrg.
ma Joint Cour~ha1 ~ me- r,ul.v' n ~
frra bra1,Ls, 81 hs Isridrr,r " Nri-s.
Ap1i jh, 1856, for hs purpose of ad0i'-
h7g WnafYry Darl,, oHs Of 10. JrPi.''
ofh. S4pr,m JnhIa Court. % 0hau7y
n ip S,t,Hos upon rvinl rhdrgt dgm1r
him ,Hiurd upon hr JourHai ~ Oh. Nu1's,
Narh lyh, lSj6.-
Md now the said Woodbury. Davis. al.
herring a. his protest already presented, AMI
Kelvin. upon the .luc. anil waving Up oh.
,,ctlu g. tho prprrrdinrs named in ssIi pr.
tr.'. 10 answer - the rharr against him
-lys ~ follows, via .--
That 10 is not true that be-, th' sail
Woodbury. Davis. 40 the term, uf the So
promo Judicial Court holden hy him iur tha
County Of Cumberland, in the month of
January last. md In The mouth of March,
has refused o. rrrp.uifn thr official luthuri-
Is and privilege NJ Daniel &. Emery, who
had hrfprr h,rn duly appointed. c1mmis-
stoned and qualified ls thc sheriff of AL
County" excerpt that hc. trn .lii Nuulhu-
~ Davis, no said term. Ut Court, l>fuIri
VI Baker hain. employed AMI 81 umn. siIlI
O. b. employed q. thr u05crr ct th' tpur',l
upUn the application Ut the 'ail Daniel 4.
En.ry g. b employed hy Oh. Court 90 exc
cute the Orders and prHrrT'' thereof, o. t''
exclusion of sll Baker. mot lriur of thHuri-
niou that .lii Emery was duly authorized
o. act ia thc premises, the said Woodbury.
Da,i, Iil decline % employ hm o. execute
thr SINE.
AnI the aid Woodbury. Dtyi. Doe me-
admit that said " Daniel 4. Emery has hvru
duly appointed ne doe sheriff u' SAIL tuun-
,y, AMI hr iruir. that Toe LEGISLATURE hls
any authority under the Constitution Ul
this state - determine tii, question tprauy
other department ct the government.
And tie sad Woodbury. Da,I, answering
further $50. that 10 neither Ut sad terms
oG Court did hr issue, Ur " undertake o. b.
Sue, any " prrJcpt ct sail Court, io Do
executed bS any "UarHn a Sheriff of
al COUNTY" lIut h. admits chat, 'c-
ing satisfied that seward VI lhkrr was lu-
Us authorized q urt a. sheriff of s1iI tuun-
~. and tlir said Baker claiming thr Tuvi-
leg OF being employed hy thr Court, Doe Odd
employ said Baker boz tln tr,nNciilnsu' the
busiuy., pl lil Court and hn denies any
authority on the part of the legislature %
determine Tor any other department ct che
government that .Ad Baker chad been lave
FULLY removed from tat Office"
And the ,li Wp.dhury Davis answering
further say, that hr has hrru informed and
believe, that before hccrimlnal term ct said
Court hpll.iu said County uf Cumberland,
iu thr month Ut March. tho -,ii n. e. Fine.
~ took possession II the uil iu said County
by force, and appointed keeper thereof,
into whose cdstJly Boz committed the pri.
,rucr, ia said Jail. but il is not true that
he. the .aid Woodbury. Davis lii remove,
or &c undertake o. remove said prisoners from
uil by proceeding not warranted hy law"
On motion Of the County Attorney be sent
an officer IN attendance upon said court with
verbal orders g. bring sail prisoner. into
court, that they might answer - the in
dirtm.ut, therein pending against them.
And the keeper of the nil having refused
'hc'eup0n {, srnd said prisoners into tlur',
the Clerk uf said Court wa directed o. is-
sue a oapi1i T. said oIcrr, tor said prison.
crs, therein dire, ting the ail1r o. deliver
said prisoner. h. tlc oihcar Cor that purpose
which prrcept the keeper oi the pail ,ulun-
arily and Ic,csahly obcycd, and the pri-
.oncrs h,ins brought into Court u answer
Z, sri indictments, were discharged or Re
committed, as the Judgment in each case rf-
quircc.
And the said Woodbury. Davis answering
further, says, that IL Is not true that, lin
his capacity rs judge, be- has assumed, with
cut legal issue, or judicial trial thereof, Ia
DENY the lawful aud actual validity OF the
commission oi the said Daniel {. Emery, Is
sued under the hand of the Governor and
the sea' Of the State" The sah Daniel {.
Emery and Seward VI. Baker aforesaid, each
held a commission under the hand Of the
Governor and seal OF the State. The latter
was in attendance upon the Court,-thc
former applied To be employed ia his stead.
lie had given previous notice in pcrson and
by counsel, that such application would be
made, and had requested the Court 10 h.
prepared 10 decide upon it. As an applh
cation 10 be employed in the service OF the
Court, it was lesltimately presented for de-
ci.lon. IL was ably argued on. behalf OF
said Emery by his counsel. on the ground
that be was duly authorized under the con-
stitutiou. u act as Sheriff of the County IN
eIccuting the orders and precrpts OF the
Court And. having given the matter such
consid, ration a., under the pressure OF other
duties. he, the said Woodbury. DAVIS, was
of the opinion that said Seward VI. Baker
was stilithe Sherifof the County, and there.
fore he decided TO continue 10 employ hnn,