The Nevada Democrat., 1861-09-24
For the Nevada Democrat.
District Judge OF the Fourteenth Judi
cial District.

L. ID.
to the office of District Judge for said District
by the electors of Nevada county, the question
arises. when does the term for which he has
been elected commence?
Article 9th, section 9Th, of the Constitution OF
the State of California, limits the term OF the
office of District Judge to six years; viz, "Said
Judges shall be elected bv the qualified electors
of their respective districts at the general cleo
ton, and shall hold their Office for the term Of
six years"
The constitution does not provide that said
Judges shall hold their Office for the term of six
years, and until their successors shall be elected
and qualified, neither is there any such pro-
vision in the laws of this State concerning said
office.
The question then arises, when did the Hon.
Niles Searls, Judge of said District Court, enter
upon the term of his Office?
BY reference to the record it will be found
that he was elected to said Office at the general
election in 1855, and obtained his commission,
qualified, and entered upon the term of his Of
fee on the lst of October, 1856.
The question then arises, does the cOnstitu-
ton of the State of California fix any period Of
time that the term of office shall commence'
This question has been fully considered, and
passed upon by the Supreme Court of the State
of California in the following cases.
People ex rel McKune VS.. John b. Weller,
Governor; llth Cal. Reports, page 40.
People as John B. Weller, Governor; llth
Cal. Reports, page II.
In the last case cited the Supreme Court say,
viz: "Now the Constitution of this State does
not fix the time of the commencement of the
term of the District Judge" See llth Cal.
Reports, page 81. The same is affirmed in
Eth Cal. Reports, page 39l to 394. Also,
Westbrook VS. Roseborough, l4th Cal. Reports,
page 40.
Then if the constitution of the State does not
fix the time for the commencement of the term,
does the law creating the l4th Judicial District
and with it the Office held by the Hon. Niles
Searls? Or is there any general law controlling
the commencement of the term?
The statute creating said 18th Judicial Dis
trict was passed April 10th, 1855. See statutes
1855, page | IL and IlS.
At the first glanca it might appear that Sec
tion I'd Of said act. page lS, created two terms;
one to be filled by the Governor by appoint
ment, and the other by election; but subse-
quent and amendatOry act, passed April 26th,
1855, repealed the said 2nd section. See stat
utes 1866, page l49, section lst.
This last act passed April 26th, 1855, makes
no provision for term of Office to be filled by
appointment by the Governor This, perhaps,
was for the reason that the constitutional power
vested in the Governor to fill vacancies in
Office was then discussed, in view of the crea-
ton of new Districts; and the Office with said
district; and it was gravely mooted that there
must first be an incumbent before there could
be vacancy in office.
At any rate after discussion of the question
the Legislature passed the act aforesaid of April
26th, 1865, section lst repeating section I'd Of
the act passed April 10th, 1856
Section I'd of the act of April 26th, providing
for the first term by election.
And section Sd of same act staying or sus-
pending the operation of the act of April 18th
till the lst day Of Agust 1855.
This stay OF the act was doubtless for the pur-
pose of leaving as short time as possible to
intervene between the formation Of the districts
and the qualifying of Judges after election to
fill said districts, giving merely the time for
proclamation before election.
Is it reasonable under these circumstances,
and the acts &C., cited that the Legislature in
tended to postpone the commencement of the
term in the districts thus created (the l4th be-
ing one Of them) to the lst of January, 1856?
Is it presumable that the Hon. Niles Searls
with mind deeply imbued with legal knowl-
edge usurped the Office and donned the ermine
three months before the commencement of his
term of office created by said act?
Or rather is it not plain by constituting the
act as passed April 10th and amended April
26th as aforesaid; that the Legislature intended
that the term of office for said districts then
created, should commence as soon after the
election, as the several Judges then elected
could obtain commission, and qualify?
1t was due to the people of the State of Cal
fornia having demands against the people of
said 18th, l4th, and 18th Judicial Districts Gre
ated by said act as we'll as the entire people of
said districts; that their civil rights should not
be suspended after their separation from the old
districts, any longer than was absolutely neces-
sary to enable the several Judges elected under
s1id act to obtain their commissions and
qualify.
II n. Judge Searls, elected in Sept. 1855, did
obtain his commission, qualify, and enter upon
the duties of his office in October, 1855.
1t was right that the Hon. Niles Searls lost
no time in qualifying; this was in harmony with
the letter. and spirit of the act, and was neces-
sary to prevent delays, and embarrassment in
the administration of justice.
In the case of Blodri VS.. Campbell, IL Cal.
Reports, the Supreme Court in speaking of the
commencement of the term of the District
Judge use the following language, very appro
pirate in the case now under consideration, IL
Cal. Reports, page 20, viz: ait is sufficient for
them (the courts) in determining the commence
nent OF any particular term of office, when that
is not fixed by the designation of a day certain,
that the statute requires commission to issue
to the officer, and his oath of Office to be en-
dOrsed thereon, and leaves its issuance to the
Governor without prescribing the period within
which this shall take place. In such case we
u u [ look to the qualification Of the officer to
ascertain the date at which his term beains."
I'd. "The record in the Office of the Secre-