New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1872-03-17
THE COURTS.
limited States Circuit onr..

po,hor parsons and Benjamin Halsey,
o;t;nans of the State Of New YORK, e oliu
e',;t nv Hill in chancery in the United ola'u1
C sG,y Court against Charles J.; ho no"
and F. F. Wilder, Of Louisiana Hh 1ae;s Of
Murray, of New Jersey, ana Lou,s we're
the State of Ohio. Inc eco CON pi" Inc business
sssociated. in the year 1867 IN the ot 4;ailess
af ""ndncting lotteries ard selling tlcke.ss
y; y, the state of Kentucky, under certain
III n;,. To- which were their lawful PROV
PRIV I|nder a certain trhst deed =. L.
H. ri vas the agent Of McHurray a ~
We'd Cotton {. Co., lottery dealers IA IT
mo nsferred to this firm Their rign'. -.
H0ward used in procuring tne iran' s,,", q
under the Louisiana lottery az. o ,a ba has
~ ~ orc0unted. The compliments seC ny
hat ali the profits of the lottery COMPANY
! ave un6er the deed OF trust lorneiiy q"
The nrayer is that the business may NC
| ..,ro,1nd M" that C. T. Howard q 20. may
account for the money and properly Mio
| fully received, converted ana approx, Ia Jo'
by them, and they and each OF tr ILL., NC en- w"
creed agents for compliments. lhey lu'
ther nray for an injunction to restrain .!io
defendants from selling, assigning or ois
nosing of the said grant under the lot'eis
Twenty-four jurors ordered to appear IN
| the United States District Court on Mohoas'
| at eleven o'clock. e william,
The appraiser in the suit OF Nl William
Do,le AGAINST the LOtawanna was ordereU
! to pe paid $l56. ,1o r.
l. IN the same case the intervenors rule =.
| NJ Theeley into court to show why the
funds should not be transferred 10 the
United States Circuit Court, where Tie case
is pending. ,oor
The executor of William Avet has been
substituted in the case against loo boxes u
sugar for William Avet, the claimant. =.
The steamer Richmond, now IN llnoo, Is
ordered to be appraised with a view 10
bonding. ~
No objection being made to the SAFE OF
the steamboat Belle Ida, it was on trlal de.
creed that it shall take place after ten DAYS
advertisement.
be sold.
Thomas Newman brings suit in the United
States Circuit Court against the Claiborne
Street Railroad Company for $4,000 dam
aces for infringement of certain exclusive
privileges for an improvement Ill railroad,
switches.
Goxerpor.. Power of Removal from Office.
In the old matter of the successor to the
most of Secretary of State, Judge Dlbble
Yesterday rendered the following decision
to the suit waged by Bovee under the intru-
sion act:
The State of Louisiana. ex rel. Joseph
Wittgepotein, VS.. Frank j. Heron and john
W. Fairfax-Reasons for Sustaining Excep-
tions-This is proceeding under the lntru-
sion act. The petition AYERS thar on the
first day of February, 1871 Joseph Wittgen-
stein. Joined herein with the State, was duly
appointed and qualified as Assistant Secre-
tary of State, by George E. Bovee, Secre-
tarv of State: that the term OF the office TO
which he was appointed is not fixed by law,
and that there is no authority to remove
him. The petitioner further charges tnat
the defendant. Frank j. Heron. has unlaw-
fully intruded into the office of Secretary OF
State, and now unlawtully intrudes into
and holds said Office.
The petition still further AYERS that the
said Heron has assumed to remove the
relator. Wittgenstein, from the office of
Assistant Secretary of state. and to ap-
point John w. Fairfax thereto: that this
pretended appointment is illegal. and that
said Fairfax is unlawfully intruding into,
and is now illegally holding the said office.
Fairfax is made party to the suit.
The petition further charges that Heron
is Ineligible to the Office of Secretary OF
State.
The PRAYER is that F. j. Heron be decreed
to be intruding into and uniawfully hold
ing the office OF Secretary of State; that }.
w alEldA Ut 10 Dt III W
and to be Illegally holding the office OF
Assistant Secretary of State, and that
Joseph Wittgenstein. joined with the State.
be adjudged to be entitled to have and TO
hold the office of Assistant Secretary of
State. and that he be put in possession OF
said office.
The defendant, F. J. Heron. files an ex-
ception that the right to the Office of Sec
rotary of State and Assistant Secretary of
Stofn la tried in rho s,it Ha
pleads the case of the State ex rel. George
+. Bovee VS.. +. J. Heron, No. }}5J56 of tie
docket OF this court, as res ddjudtcdtd.
Fairfax filed a similar exception in respect
to nllsoinder of parties, and as TO the claim
of Wittgenstein that the petition discloses
no cause OF action.
In the argument OF these exceptions the
attorney for the State and the intormer as
sumo that if the Secretary of State had been
suspended the assistant shall act in his
stead, and that, therefore, Wittgenstein is
entitled to possession of the office during
the suspension of the Secretary. provided
that be, Wittgenstein was not legally re-
moved.
l do not so understand the act approved
December Il. 1868, authorizing the Secre-
tary OF State to appoint an assistant He
IS appointed to assist the Secretary: the
Secretary Is alone responsible for his acts.
and he is only authorized TO act as Secre-
tary during the sickness or absence of his
principal. The Assistant Secretary of State
acts officially only with relation to a prin-
clpal, who is responsible for his official con-
duct. He can not succeed nor supercede
his principal, and assume the discharge of
a constitutional office to which he has not
been chosen by the people or appointed by
the executive.
This preceding. therefore, so far as Witt
gensteln Is concerned, is suit for the re-
covery OF the subordinate and ministerial
of1ce OF Assistant Secretary of State.
Without considering the plea of res adiu-
dtcdt0 filed by Heron. it seems clear that
MS exceptions to being dragged into this
contest for the office of Assistant Secretary
should be, sustained. A proceeding against
INN Tor lntruding into the Office of Secretary
must pe direct and at the instance of some
one claiming as against him.
The argument of the exception of Fair
tax that the petition dis closes no cause of
action against him or in favor of Wittoen-
stem, turned upon the question whether an
oTlcer IN this State, whose tenure of Office
is not fixed is removable at pleasure Nv
the appointing power.
There are three classes of officers cons;d-
cred as to tenure:
Those who hold during good behavior.
~. Ihose who are appointed for certain
time '''--
Those who are appointed for an indef-
mite time. -
There are no officers in this State annoin+-
ed during good behavior. Most officers an
the State are appointed or elected for a term
nAed. few are appointed for an indefinite
period. Such an officer may be removed AT
any time by the appointing power.
Inc discussions of the question whether
the power OF appointing a public officer in
IolEes the power TO remove him. have been
had l1,-,, IL.