The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1868-08-19

Cotton firm and active. Yarns and
fabrics firm in Manchester.
The Quo Wnrranto.
OPINION OF THE COURT.
CHAMBERS, SUPREME Court,
COLUMBIA, August Is, 1868.
The State er rel. Acknowledgement
Us. Thomas P. Walker.
Willard, A. J. The Attorney-Gene-
raj, in behalf of the State, has filed
q suggestion and obtained a rule to
show cause for the purpose of GUST
ing the respondent from the Office of
Coroner of Richland County. The
respondent has appeared and made
claim to exercise and enjoy the office
In question, under an appointment
to that Office made by the Governor
of the State, and has produced O
commission therefor, bearing date
the 21st day of December, 1864. He
claims that by the tenure under
which he holds said Office his term
will not expire until the 21st day of
December, 1868 On the other hand.
it is claimed, in behalf of the State,
that William B. Johnston is the law
full Coroner of Richland County, and
holds under commission from the
present Governor, and has duly
qualified, and has demanded of the
respondent possession of all matters
appertaining to said ioffice, and that
the respondent has refused to deliver
the same to said Johnston.
The question at issue is, the right
of the respondent to hold and exer-
else the Office of Coroner. Accord.
ing to the case presented, in behalf
of the State, the termination of the
right of the respondent to hold the
office in question depends upon the
due election or appointment, as the
case may be, of Johnston, and his
having qualified therefor under the
provisions of the Constitution of the
State.
The title by which Johnston claims
the Office in question having arisen
while the State was under military
government, in pursuance of the au-
thority of the acts of Congress, COM
monty known as the Acts Of Recon
struction, it is contended by the
counsel for the respondent that such
title Is nugatory and void, the au-
thority by which such military 60
vernment acted being in derogation
of the rights of South Carolina as a
State under the Constitution of the
United States. The precise question
presented before the Court, as involv-
ing the merits of the present contro-
versy, is whether the supreme au-
thorlty invested under the Acts of
Congress with powers of military go
Vernment over persons and property
within the State of South Carolina,
regarded as part of the Second
Military District, could rightfully
terminate the right of the responi-
ent to hold the Office in question. and
vest in the claimant, Johnston, a right
and title to said Office, which can be
recognized under tine existing Con.
stitution and laws of the State. II
is not denied that Congress sought
to confer such power, and that the
commanding officer representing the
military authority within such Mill
tarJ District has assumed its exer.
else.
The practice established under the
statutes of the State authorizes a
Judge Of the Appellate Court to hear
and determine, at chambers, ques-
tions OF this character, and to award
such Judgment as the nature of the
case may demand. The grounds of
this Jurisdiction need not be stated,
as they were not the subject of con-
test in this case.
The issue involved in this case is
one OF momentous Importance, both
as affecting the validity of acts of
public authority, to which legal inte-
rests OF great magnitude, both pub
ilc and private, have become con-
formed, and as the first appeal to the
Judiciary, under the present Consti-
tuition of Eha Stata ,,,,an aA.. D .