Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1870-06-05
Circuit COurt..J. T. swayns, Iudus.


The cai g of Anderson, use, VS.. Ben,
May, the first on the calendar, yesterday,
was taken up and occupied the attention
of the Court the entire day.
Judgments as of jury were entered
in the following cases
Miller VS.. Gould ct al. for plaintiff,
S267l Sc; Cratford VS.. Roote, for plaintiff, SIS.
Marcus j. Wright, sheriff, in obedience
to an order of the Court heretofore made,
in the contested election case of Curry VS..
Wright, appeared in Court aud executed
two bonds, one for $4,000 to secure the
fees of Office and to pay over the net pro-
ceeds in case the said Wright is cast in the
suit. The other for 5000 conditioned to
pay all damagGs and costs by reason of
the wrongful suing out of the Injunction
should Curry be successful. The follow
ing are the subscribers to the bonds; j.
M. Provine, Geo. G. Holmes, ID. G. Cress
and w. r. Holmes.
The grand jury made their report on
Friday, and were discharged. The report
is unimportant. t-
Judge Swayne delivered the following
opinion in the Curry=Wright contested
election case: r.....s
State rel. Wright Tvs. A. P. Curry and
State rel. Curry VS.. M. J. Wright. Nation
by Curry to set these causes for trial at
the present term of the court.
'Allusion is made by counsel to what
the newspapers say of these cases. have
not seen the articles particularly mem
toned, and the court is not influenced by
the sayings of the press or any person or
of the public. It is true l can but notice
the unusual, and, / may add, the undue
public animosities these cases have excit-
ed, but with such or any other outside
circumstances, the court has and has had
nothing to do except to treat them with
the utmost indifference. In the perform
ance of the public duty of the court the
law is its only guide. 1t might very prop
erly be provided by law that this class of
cases be speedily tried and disposed of, in
asmuch as the terms Of Office involved,
whether longer or shorter are, pending
the cases passing away, and the rightful
claimants are, fout for the corresponding
time, deprived of them, The Injunction
bond giving the money value of the office
is hardly an adequate compensation for
the deprivation.
But the office of the Court is not to
make the law as it should be, but to ex-
pound and apply it as il is. How is it
upon the motion before me in this State
A few days ago when the question was
before me the Court remarked substan-
TALLY as above, and no authority being
produced in support of the motion under
our statutes on the subject, or constituting
E0GHs OI 1ikb HtdbubbS OtuOA obdtcS VI
elsewhere, the Court deferred judgment in
order (and in the hope) that such author
tiles might be produced by counsel. l
am now advised by the eminent counsel
that he has $50 far been unable to find
any other direct authority" Whatever
may be the practice in other States, If we
have rule or practice on the subject in
this State, the latter must prevail and
govern. The code, section 34l5, declares
that these suits Twill be conducted as
other suits IN equity, with this restriction
only, that the bills shall set forth briefly
and without technical forms the grounds |
upon which the suits are instituted, and |
in furtherance of this course of proceed |
ings In the next section it provides that |
the defendants appear and answer the |
bill I'm the usual ray" and in section |
1923, provision is also made contemplat-
ing the death of relator pending the ac- |
ton, and also contemplating expressly |
ga second term thereafter" Other pro- |
visions, too, of the same chapter contem- |
plate the usual course of equity SUITS" |
and none of them the contrary.
1t is Insisted by counsel that section