New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1870-11-19
THE COURTS.
The Contested Election Case-The In
junction Refused-Judge Dibble's De-

junction Refused-Judge Dlbble's DE.
cisiOn.
Yesterday morning, the room Of the
Eighth District Court was crowded with
interested partisans and lawyers, drawn
thither for the purpose Of hearing the de-
cision of Judge Dibble in the matter of the
contest for the office of Civil Sheriff Of II
parish of Orleans.
After giving a clear and distinct history
Of the case, together with the statutes re-
lating to elections, the Judge proceeds to
say:
Taking all of the allegations Of this peti-
ton for true, there ia no case for an injunc-
ton. The returning officers are not charged
with the violation of any law. while the
complaint against them is, that they have
not done thing which they have no power
or legal authority to do. Their duties are
specially set forth in sections tifty-four and
tifty-fve They are to canvass the returns
of votes transmitted to them by the Super
visOrs, and to pass upon such statements OF
violence OF corrupt practices as may have
been made by the Commissioners and SUI
pervisors.
Beyond this they have no power. What
such statements of commissioners shall be
is beyond the power of any court to say,
because, in making such statements, those
who make them are bound to investigate
facts, weigh testimony and adjudge conclu-
SlOOS unUtr OdCu. NO uhN can Uc CUlUfcLtU
to swear as another thinks
In the,economy of our governmental ma
chinery the process Of choosing public Ofii-
GERS comes under the supervision of two
departments of the government. First, the
executive branch acts Voters are registered;
ballots are taken and counted; results are
announced. Here the Judiciary will only in
terfere to compel officers to observe the law
and perform acts charged upon them, about
1, how Hut ia IN Iv
when the political branch has completed
its work that the Judiciary steps in to decide
qsestions Of right between man and man,
or between the State and its citizens.
Courts Of Justice do not govern, nor partici-
pate in government, for they have no wills.
Writs of injunction do not Issue to prevent
every apprehended wrong. The Lesisia-
ture may intend to pass an oppressive law;
it can not be restrained by the Judiciary.
The chief magistrate may purpose appoint
ing an improper person to Office who will
int1ict injury; he can not be controlled in his
executive functions. The Governor and his
associates may be upon the point Of declar-
ing G. S. Sauvinet duly elected Sheriff of
the parish of Orleans, when, indeed. this
plaintiff is entitldV(tO have such declaration
in his favor; no court of justice has the
right to interfere, because judges are not
the conscience keepers OF other officers who
are charged with the exercise Of discretion.
and who act under an oath not less solemn
and binding than their own.
This view does not detract an iota from
| the honor and dignity of the judicial office.
With it remains the ultimate power of deci-
| sion of all such questions as are involved in
| this contest. The constitution declares that
the temple of justice shall always remain
| open. but the finger of law traces the path
| by which the citizen must approach.
| The statutes relative to contested cleo
! tions give adequate remedy.
| But the plaintiff says that the anticipated
| decision Of the defendants against him may
for the time being deprive him of his office.
If such be the result, nothing will be taken
away from lim which belongs to him. Pub
| lie offices are not subject to ownership.
| They belong to the State alone. Particular
| the contested election laws provide ample
security for the protection of such rights;
| the office can never be his Snch claims
are only made in otheI lands.
| One point made by plaintiff g counsel de-
serves special notice. The law requires
| that contested election cases shall be Instl-
| tuted within ten days after the close OF the
election. They construe this to mean ten
| days after election day. They argue that
the period is about to elapsc and the re-
turning officers have not made their declara-
| tion Of results; that these officers may SO
continue their delay as to deprive candi-
| dates of the opportunity of contesting.
Therefore, the court ought to interpose its
authority to compel them to hear complaints
of illegality. But this argument proves too
much. If contestants can not institute ac-
ton after ten days, the court would be
wrong to interfere so as to prevent proc
lamation of results, and thus deprive the
| one defeated by the canvass from resOrting
! to the judicial branch for ultimate decision.
| But this whole argument about the right
TO contest being defeated by another delay,
is futile. The Legislative and Executive
branches of the government would be un..
able to devise plan whereby to defeat and
prevent an application to the courts OF
Justice Here the aesis of the constitution
protects the citizen, declaring that the
'.courts shall be open, and every person fOl
injury done him in his lands. goods, persons
or reputation, shall have adequate remedy
| by due process of law, and justice admins
| tered without denial or unreasonable de-
| lay" So if the law, and the acts of those
who administer it, conspire to prevent q
! resort to the courts, the law must be set
aside and the acts of its officers held as
! naught, for the constitution declares the
| unchanging will of the State.
| The imprOpriety Of the einterference sought
could not be better illustrated than by re-
| ference to the practical effect. This cleo
! ton was general. The defendants are re-
| turning officers for the whole State, and are
| required to canvass the votes of every
| parish and municipal candidate, as well as
for those who ran in Orleans and through
the State at large. If the board are to hear
complaints, take evidence and pass upon
charges of violence and corrupt practices,
made by every defeated candidate, the labor
would be interninable, and the will of the
people would be defeated, for the officers
chosen would be prevented fDm acting for
an indefinite time. Every man who is cast at
a public election believes that he has been
| wrongfully defeated; he can not under
stand how it is possible that large ma
.jority of the people have not recognized his
transcendent virtues and his paramount
fitness for the place for which they insisted
upon his running. Thus would the wheels
of government be clogged.
It is unnecessary to say more. This Is
not case for injunction.
1t is therefore ordered that the writ of
injunction prayed for be refused at plaintiffs 9
costs.
After the reading of the decision, counsel
for Mr.. Maxwell made o motion for q sus-
pensive appeal which was promptly refused
by Judge Dibble, on the ground that an ap-
peal can not be taken from an interlocut0ry
order:
It is announced that Judge Dibble, Of the
Eighth District Court, will this morning de-
liver his opinion in tho matter of the con-
troyersy between Mr.. Conway, State Super
intendent of Public Education, and the
Ward Boards of City School Directors.
The commerce of the world requires 3, ,60O,-
900 of able bodied men to be continually
travcrsing the sea. Of this number proba-
bly, $500 die every year. The amount of
,,rorarfy annuollu moved IN fba water ia