The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1869-10-09
At Chambers, Sumter, October 4, 1859.
THE FLOUR INSPECTOR.


The State er RelatiOne the Attorney General Us.
". Cd,Ifeld.
The information in this case relates TO the office
of Inspector of Flour for the City OF charleston.
The office referred to is Inspector OF Flour LOT te
Parishes of St. Philips and ST. MlchaeIs, as u Is
properly called in the argument OF Mr.. Tharln, lor
the respondent.
II sets forth the election OF c. \. Averill by the
Council on the 29th day OF December, 1868, 1or tne
full term of two years, his assumption OF the once
and discharge Of its duties, until usurpatl0n and
possession Of it b. the said NJ. Caulfield, who
claims to exercise the duties appertalnlng 10 the
same, and prays process OF quo warranto against
the said Caulfeld.
the Legislature. With this exception, the facts
and the readings are the same as sumbtted In the
case Of the State eX reatione the Attorney Gene
raj vs. Patrick J. Coogan, and the questions arls-
ing have been there considered and decided.
An additional point has been made here by the
counsel now representing the respondent.
The act ''to provide for the inspection OF nour"
was passed on the Goth December, 1850, ana re-
uured and authorized the Governor, on or before
the 25th day of the same month, to appoint the
inspector, who was to continue Ill ohce ior t"o
years.
On the 2lst December, 1854 the act was amend.
ed. and the appointment conferred on the City
Council. ,.,
goth December 1868, was against law, and the
election of Caulfield therefore void.
For the proper understanding OF this question,
the day of the first election under the act OF 1854
should have been made known to the court by the
pleadings or otherwise, so that the date OF the eX
piration Of the term Hereunder could be ascer-
tanned.
1t could not have been the intention Of the Le-
gislature that the time fixed by the act OF 1850
was to be mandatory on the Council. so TO con-
slider it, would charge the Legislature with the
absurd reQuiSitiOn OF an impoSSibility. The act
was not ratified until the 2lst, and how could the
election he made by the 25th, when, by law, ten
days notice OF the election for every city office Is
to be given in the public papers?
Was 1t to remain vacant until the next ensuing
25th December?
am not even satisfied that the period fixed for
the appointment by the Governor, In the act OF
1850 bound the Council TO an election by the same
day. under the power given to 1t by the act OF
1854.
any length. shall only refer 10 what Is said by
the court in the case Of The People VS.. RunKen,
John, Q, 147: "That trustees elected after the
day would be in by color OF office; that the cleo
ton would not be void, and their acts would be
good, and the irreguarity, if any, would cure It.
self In a subsequent year."
The State is entitled to Judgment OF custer
against the respondent, NJ. Caulfeld.
1t is therefore ordered, that the respondent, NJ.
Canlfeld, do not in any manner, further inter-
medde with, or concern himself about, the salu
office of Inspector Of Flour, or with the duties,
rights. books and property Of the said office but
exercising or using the same, or any OF them Tor
the future and that lie abstain from doing or per-
forming or assuming to do or perform, any ACT
or acts whatsoever In any manner pertaining 10
the said office, on pain OF contempt OF the court
Let all the papers be filed In the office OF the
Clerk OF the Court for the County OF Charleston.
F. j. MOSES.
Ar Chambers Sumter. October @, 1862