New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1873-08-03
Important Decision of the Supreme Court.

We publish below an important decision
of the Supreme Court, recently rendered at
the sitting at Monroe. This is one OF the
most important cases determined by that
tribunal for some time, putting at rest, as
it does, the pretension Of men TO Office
holding commissions from John MeEnery,
the head of the recent pretended State gev'
eminent:
The State VS.. Zack McFarland.-Appeal
from Caddo. Chief Justice Ludellng de-
liyered the opinion of the court. lack NC
Farland was indicted for murder a: me
term Of the Tenth District Court. IN CaddO
parish. held in January, 1873. He was
admitted to bail by the presiding ludge.
Upon the failure Of Mcfarland 20 appear
according to the terms OF his bono, JUG
ment was rendered against him and MS
bonGsmen. The suretes flied a motion to
set aside the judgment nis:. 1t alleges tnat
there is no indictment against Mcr arlanu
to which he can be legally compelled TO
answer; that no legal warrant issued
against him; that he was not arrested, anu
| that the bond was not taken by any one
legally authorized to take the same. and IS
therefore null and void; that tie indictment
was not found by legal grand jury, and
| that even though the indictment be held to
| be valid (which is denied) still said
| Mcfarland can not be compelled 10 appear
before this court at the present term;
| because the law prohibits him and all
others. especially officers Of the State. from
! recognizing in any manner usurpers IN
| office, and because the Offices OF clerk OF
| said court and sheriff of said parish are
| now usurped by S. NJ. Morrison and ). w.
| Pickens, pretending to act. without au-
thority of an election, declared Dy the re,
turning board constituted by law. and
| without commissions from the Governor OF
the State. 1t further alleges tina. said
| Morrison and Pickens have openly
! adhered 70 recognized and attempted to
maintain the usurping government known
| as the McEnerv government: that they are
usurpers legally assuming or pretending
| to be public officers. without any shadow
or color of right, in defiance OF law; anc
shat all their acts, as such, being subven'
sive of the government and IN c9ntraver-
ton of prOLioirory laws, are absolutely
pull and void" The motion further repre-
sents that the returning board. constituted
| by law, has legally declared l. b. Halla-
| way. clerk, and A. FiOurnOy, sheriff OF
| Caddo parish; that the Governor OF the
State commissioned them as such officers,
and that they were duly qualified 10 act,
| long anterior to the date on which SAID IL
| dictment was filed. and that they were the
discharge the functions of their respective
! offices. II alleges the judge had 10 right
| to order Pickens to take the bond. and the
| said Pickens was without authority 20 take
the bond, being forbidden by law from
doing SO. and that the bond is utterly null
and void. II is further alleged that no
iudgmen: could have been rendered on
said bond, or any other action taken there
Oh at that term Of the court, because the
Offices of clerk and sheriff were violently
Usurped. and the lawful clerk and sheriff
were prevented from discharging the du-
ties of their respective offices by said Nor
rison and Pickens. The motion was over
ruled, Judgment was signed. and the sure
ties have appealed. II Is evident that, II
the allegations made IN the motloh ne
true, the motion should have been main
tanned, as there can be 10 Judicial proceed
ings in the distric: court without clerk
and sheriff: and the allegations substan-
tially, amounts this: That practically
the District Court Of Caddo parish
had neither Of those officers acting when
the proceedings in this case were had. Ii
is necessary, therefore, to deciCe whether
or not S. NJ Morrison and J. w. Pickens
were, respectively, clerk and sheriff OF
Caddo parish during the time when the
AZORES aid proceedings occurred. 1t appears
tina, L. Z. Holloway and A. tlOurnoy. Jr.'
were respectively declared elected TO the
Offices of clerk and sheriff OF Caddo
parish by the board Of returning officers
and that they were duly commissioned as
such on the twenty-s.xth day OF December
1872 by Acting Governor Pinchback. 1t IL
admitted that they qualified. according tc
law 1t appears also that 5. VI. Morrison
received what purports to be commlSsloI
signed BY Governor Warmoth. bearing tht
date of fourth December. 1872, although Il
was not received until the twenrv-third O.
December. 1872. II is admitted he took the
oath of office and gave bond. The same
statement of facts is applicable 70 ): w
| Pckens. 1t appears that SAID Morrison
| and Pickens obtained possession OF thu
buildings and records of the offices OF clerl
and sheriff. and that Holloway and Flour
nov have been asserting their rights tt
their Offices since the date OF their commits
sions. S. NJ. Morrison was examined as {
witness in this case. He says that The ha
heretofore recognized the McEnery gov
eminent Of the State Of Louisiana. ant
continues so to do. My commission from
Governor Warmoth as clerk was received
! on the twenty-third of December, 1872, arC
| l qualified under it the same day
| His bond is not in this record, although
il was offered in evidence. But It is il
another record before this court. II !
executed in favor Of 1.-The Governor OF TN
State OF Louisiana without deslgnat.n!
| WHO Is uUNcEuOI VI tuC 'cthtS.
1t is admitted tina. j. w. PickeAs woul'
| make the same statements as those mad
by Morrison, in his testimony. l. is mani
| fest, from the foregoing statement OF facts
tina. S. NJ. Morrison and J. w. Pickens ar
pretending to hold their offices, and to ex
ercise the functions thereof, under wha
they call 1.-THE McEnery government" il
opposition to the authority OF the tnlte'
States, and the laws and decisions OF tn
} courts of this State. 1t would seem to b
absurd to require an argument 20 show tina
parties occupying such positions can not b
re q ,rded as de tactO officers Of the govern
ment whose authority they contemn. In
, Supreme Court of the United States he'll
the following language, N the case
Luther vs. Borden:
..It it should be decided tina. the charte
government had no legal existence durin
the period of time above mentioned, if
. the opposing government. then, tn
laws passed by its Legislature during tina
time were utilities, its taxes wrongtulll
, collected, and the judgments and sentence
of its courts. in civil and criminal cases
null and void, and the officers who carrie
their decisions into operation answered..
as ,respassers, if not. in some cases,
criminals 7 How. 80. 1t has. however
| been strenuOUsly cOntendeu that becaus
the said Morrison and Pickens were in 20;
session Of the offices. in the manne
already stated. they were dc tactO officers
and their acts cannot be attacked cOlatel
ally, and their right to sad Offices canno
be inquired into in this cOiiateTa! way: AM
many authorities have been cited TO shoN
that the acts OF de facto officers cannot b
questioned in a collateral manner. aques
J ton which at thu. late day It IS unneces
J sary to refer 10 authorities 70 support
But that argumen. is a complete petit
!, principii. 1t assumes for granted the yer