The Weekly Arizonian., 1870-01-01

T. iH not nscssIaEy4i1l these reasons an
 exceptions should be discussed in equal detail fi-r ] am constrained to dissolve, this iu Dauciiou On the defendants second exceptio
 alone that the causes sf action alleged in tn
 affidavit SEQ insufficient to authorize its issue
 Iaese rsasols demand sufficient examinalio
 t5 sh9T tasir llaey.
 The Hrs' of them is, that Coles Bashford Wa
 appointed to the office oaAstOrney-General, D
 ta. tisv=fnor of Arizons wi'hv~s .~.Aor'sy .
 ,4u sad ia dsregaton of the rights Of the peO
 Pie of the Territory.
 This allegation is wholly unsustsined by tn
 history of Arizona, it's own immediate organ act ssd ths organic act of New Mexico, whicl ughout this opinion, shall, without further dis.iac,ion be cited as il is in part of our owl organic aw
 The Oaies ot Attorney General was estab- Iiahed in Ngs Me xico, st least as aarly as Sept 1916, aed the Governor was 10 commission the o.5cer tt'earuey Code, pamphlet ?. IS Y Aet Of U0asrsis Aug, {, 1851, Sec l. Stats at Large, Yoi. 70 jI5, the territory acquired nale. .ne (th4O) late treaty with Mexico, called tar 1adseH resiy was incorporated with the Territory q New Mexico subject to all tn laws of the said last mentioned Territ.ry The Act of New Mexico, approved Feb. 2 1869, pravile,, (oee l. Cole, p. s2) the,
 there shall be sn At;orney-Gsneral appoiat, ed ,y the Governor o that Territory" Cur o"n organic act, Sec. 2 makes that of New Mexico a part of eur own.
 Indeed, tbe lsws of New Mexico would have continued in operation in Arizona after It's severance froa the former Territory, upon the principle of Public Law. tha, On a change of sovereignty, or political organization, the laws of the former sovereign or organism rs. main in forcs in the new one, until repealed or modified, excepting in 8 far aI they are an- tagonistic io it's institutions. IT. the absence of some such principle and of specia provision, in such chsea, these would be under ihe new arrange nents, that anarchy, which the law above all things deprecates.
 q repealed st the 'ime the defendant was first ap pointed Attorney GensrAl of Arizona On the contrary it is absolutely apparent and not de- nied that the act in question was in full opera ton at the time, iii thls fsrrftgrY' and justified Ene HppoTrUmsuE Uf the defendant as made
 The frat of these allegations thus absolutely fails, in fact; and in ths absence Of al ressop to the contrary this braich of the case may be left 10 the presumption Of law which without further citation, appl;ss!o every other l-nae6 o' the def"ndanss caus' that Every public cf. fear is pro sumsd to act ii'abedienca to his duty until the contrary is shoE Eu" (Martin vs. Mott. l2, Wh.l9)
 The second al egatiop on which this ininnc, ton issued is, that subseuue ntlv the said of fec of Attorney General was created by the first Legislature of Arizona, Oct. f, 1864 ani tho defendant, though member o' the same legislature, which thus created thi, office, va, appointed to fill it, Nov 10 1864
 This allegation signally fails in point of fact for by reference to the citations under the re> iator'I first allegsdou, it will appear that the office of Attorney General was first established in New Mexico, before Arizona had au organic existence, that 1t was extended .o this Terri tory by express legs! sns,tment, that the office was in full legal existence here, both when the frst appointment "ss made and when the act for it's modification and continuance here Tas passed. That act, therefore, was in no conceivable seuae the creation of the otfic of Attorney-GsoersL
 The prohibisory provision to which this ex- ,sption is doabtless intended to be referred, appears il the organic act of New Mexico, Sec g. in the following terms: No member ,. the Legislative assembly shall hold, or be appointed to any cfice, which shall have been reatsd or the salary or emoluments of which hall have bees increased, while he Ea4 mem, er duriRg the term for which hs was elected nd for on. year after the sxprstioa of such As.' Ths act was in 70 aenss a creation of he office It was merely declaration and C notification of the law as 1t then stood in rs> t 'rsncs to an existing One-s continuance eff t he same cfic.. a