Indiana State sentinel. (Indianapolis, Ind.) 1861-1865, 1864-03-14

question; tn4<= oesifeu 10 uenuI W ~ VIM my
demurrer might be overruled; that would answer
that there was no appropriation. to which de-
murer might be sustained; that would enter my
exceptions of record. and the order might 60 that
the warrant should issue. To all which the
Judge asseuted. The papers were placed in the
hands Of the Clerk with the proper entry to be
made Of record, and I requested transcript.
which received and filed in the Supreme Court.
1t is due Judge FINCH to say that he did not
read anyof the papers. and was consequently
not informed as to the particular averments of
the complaint; that he acted upon my statement
that the papers presented the question desired
adjudicated. M a
AS evidence that the character Of the pro-
ceedng was fully understood. 1 extract from
the Journal of the next morning. TUESDAY May
18th, 1869 the following editorial
INTEREST ON THE STATE DEBr.-We under
stand that the attorneys OF the Sinking Fund
Commissioners applied to the Circuit Court of
this county yesterday, for mandamus to COM
pei the State Auditor TO draw warrant for the
money % pay the interest on The State debt,
falling due next July.
The Attorney General resisted the application.
and an agreed case made and submitted TO
the Court that it might be carried to the Su.
preme Court as speedily as possible.
Following up the same subject, the Journal on
the 18th of May, 1868. contained long edito-
rial, perhaps from your pen, at least dictated by
you aszDhnimated by the same spirit exhibited
in your specetsn which, feeling the weakness of
your position and anticipating a decision ad-
verse to your views. attempt is made to cast
discrcdit upon the decision when it should be
rendeyed. and by threats to eoerce decision IA
vorable TO you. a.l
As to the propriety and deccncy of this arIi-
Gle have nothing to say. IL speaks for itself.
cit WONT DO.
"The elegant and affabe President Of the
Sinking Fund hnsscommenced a suit against
Auditor Ristne to compel the issuing of war
rant for the payment OF the interest on the State
debt
The very distinguished Attorney General
promptly appeared on the other side and an agreed
case was made TO be submitted to the Supreme
Court Judge Finch decided that the interest
must be paid. whereupon appeal was taken by
the Attorney General to the Supreme Court.
This is the haven in which the regulators ex-
pect TO find shelter.
We fear that our elegant friend, the President,
will be suspected of sharp practice 10 this mat
ter. We fear that malicious people will say il Is
only scheme TO procure decision of the SUI
preme Court to bolster up the Attorney Gen.
eral, and prevent the Treasurer from paying the
interest.
We fear that suspicious people will say that
the Attorney General is managing both sides of
this case, and that the case is not intended for
investigation but for Endorsement and pretext
for what is already determined on.
There are some things the Supreme Court can
not do, and one is to make Hord's opinion re-
spctabe or make the people believe that it is
honest. If you don't believe il. gentlemen
judges, try it, and you will get the word repudi.
ators written all over you with indelible ink. I"
On the same day, that you might have an OPP
portunity OF presenting your views in the case in
the Supreme Court. Messrs. RAND l. HALL, adj
dressed you the following note:
ISDIASAPoLrs, May -, 1863.
Hon. o. p, Morton. Governor Of Indiana:
SIN: There is now 10 the Supreme Court OF
Indiana, upon appeal from the Marion Circuit
Court. the case OF Joseph Ristine. &c. VS. the
Board OF Commissioners of the Sinking Fund,
No. 1882, involving the question of the public
duty of the appellant to issue his warrant to pay
the July interest on the State debt created in
ls46-47.
Knowing your great interest IN this question
affecting the credit OF the State, the appellees
reqrest your co operation in sustaining the de-
cision Of the Court below.
Very respectfully,
RAND HALL.
Atty's for BID Com Sinking Fund.
When the case had proceeded to this point.
was informed that Judge FIScH, upon examin-
ing the complaint. had arrived at the conclusion
that it did not show such facts as authorized the
issuing Of the writ, and desired the case pre-
scented to him again that be might sustain my
demurrer to the complaint, instead of everything
It as was done in the first entry.
Il was submitted TO him; he sustained the de-
nurrer. and rendered judgment for RIsrrSE.
From this decision the Sinking Fund Commits
sioners appealed and filed their transcript in the
Supreme Court.
10 the Journal of May is. 1863, is an editorial
giving an account of the proceedings with its
usual fairness.
"In the Circuit Court yesterday Judge Finch
ordered that the rulings in the csse Of the Board
of Sinking Fund Commissioners VS.. the Auditor
of State be cancelled upon the record. as they
were not made BY him. IL appears that Judge
Finch was hearing another case when the ator
neys in this case appeared and asked to file GER
tain papers.
They we're allowed to be filed without exam
nation. and proved tc he complaint. an answer,
and a demurrer to which added the order of
the Court written out by Attorney General
Hord.
Judge Finch, on examining the papers made
an entirely different ruling. which requires the
attorneys for the schemers and spectators in
State bonds to file other papers. The case is not
yet in the Supreme Court, but we presume that
the lawyers will be able 10 get il before that
tribunal in the course of the coming week."
In the Journal of May 20. 1863. Judge FINCH
published lengthy opinion, giving his reasons
for his ruling in sustaining the demurrer to the
complaint. i r. rs
II is accompanied by letter from the Judge,
dated May 18th. addressed to the editor of the
Journal, from which make an extract:
my object was in this, as in all other cases, ms
we'll as knew how, to determine what the law
Of the case is In doing 80 in this case l sus-
tanned demurrer fled BY the Attorney General
to the complaint Of the REALTORS. thought the
complaint was bad and ] suppose the Attorney
General thought so too, else he would not have
demurrer. | may be wrong in this; il so. il will
not be the first Time the Supreme Court and 1
have differed On overriding this demurrer,
announced the points on which my opinion was
founded / had elaborated those points in a
hastily written opinion, which. owing TO the non
attendance Of counsel for the plaintiff, did not
read. hand yon that opinion"
Judge FINCH does not in his letter make any
Statements Inconsistent with the facts as have
stated them. to the history of the first tran
script. fs