, 1874-06-13
the State, no. matter ,uhen passed, which oon-

the gtate, no. matter suhen passed, which oon-
tta7ehea tho Constitution.
bad aoorusd anterior to iLo Consultation Of 1870,
sud that tho appropriation applicable to ,auch
purposeB "hhd boon exhausted In tho paynont
of othor bills out Of tho Hame fund.-, X 10,
whonce did the Auditor derive big power to NOW
draw a warrant on the Trensurer?
UnloHs by cxiatinB law II was tho duty Of tho
Auditor to draw such warrant, tho Court would
not, BY iuat1dunlus, compel him 10 violate tho
Constitution ai,l draw tho sa,ne without appro-
prtaeion. Tho Cotnt might compel tho polfornl.
ance' Of . legal duty by nandalnns. bnt could
mob titus confer authority to do the act. 49,
The State cbuld not be mado party dofend-
ant. ahd no demand Of o otigpn ngAinst. tho
3, stats could be lawfully paid from .ho stato
General AsHombly III MI appropriation: ="
1T wna mt 10 'bo supposed TINT tho people,
through their representatives, would rofuB0 pay
inent Of just claim presented by oltlzon !; II
they did, Under our preHcut Constitution tho
Courte wore powerlcaa to afford reMody.
/ ~ = REPLY OF HELAroH. y.
In tho reply to tho hrief Of "theAttorney Cen
oral, rolator'a counsel claim TINT tho SECTIONS Of
/ not bo Unconstitutional. Tho provisions of tho
Constitution Of 1870 referred to could mt pro-
hiblt tho ueuorhl Assembly from passing inws
by whluh bona ado creditors Of tho State should
his account t-thb evidences Of thu indebtedness
Council arc nnnble to sea why or how tho
General Assembly, by gonelal Inv, could nut
WHO appropriated" " to tho discharge Of the valid
obliGAilons Of tio Btato.-.-.'
This. not q Hl,t againBt tho stNto. Tho
now Consultation did not announce a,,y now
Tic Justice Of the clntm was admitted :" The
only ground on which tho refusal is based H.,
TINT others lRvo used up nll tho money, part ,of
which ought to hayo boon applied to this claim:
The only question presented by The demutreranl
Tho Rtpulltion 10 that, II 80. entitled, tho 1nnn
dato, ,sliall bo issuod." ',-~'
Stuart, Edwards Il Drowg, Springfield, and tho
Hon. Thomas s. Casey. Mt. Vernon, Of couilBol
for re1ator.
Tho Court las the caHo under consideration.
COUNT PROCEEDINGS. ,,,.'
Tho frat busneaB transacted this morning
was to dispose Of previously pending motions, AZ
follows: :
ny NJ. Jus. oyaia.-1os. George W. Bracket vs.
is motion In this to al1ka tho bill Of oxcopens
no orderea ~ ho
ii te snd presented i. to tke Gilcuit 5aago; but
though ssyeril timos asked for it Dy appellant: we
thuk tho appellant showed sufficient diigcnee, and
/ motion iA ovorruted.
q v:..0; sugeman ct al-Esroe to Jersey,
LIS TGGOrQ LILLE C1Ho u ulat ro1 q. 1CEOetuHT2
Of mortgage and sate Ind under the decree. The
motion is to make tho purchaser at tho mcrtgagesn6
party to tie record, and also to this aurorsouUas- We
hayo Eulo for making parties In such caaea. The
elh Eulo provides that " In MI wheroin guar.
danB, executors. administrators, otlura noting
In fduciury character, hAyo mRintaiued order OF
lcgroo for the sale Of lands tn rarte, and
sale has beon hnd undcr auc decree order, md tlt
shall DO brought to this Court for revision, the
purchaser ;teTre-tsnantS Of such Ihnds II known
sbal 10 suggested TO the Court by affidavit Of tut
plaintiff in error, and notice given them OF tho pen
1ency Of tho writ Of ten days before tho frst day
Of tue term Of tho Court 10 Which tho writ OF error
Teturnabe, that amid terrstcsants may appear anu
| defend" ~"
Ite1tends no further. VIC hAvo no power 10 make
other partles the record than those who appear
hnve been partios In tho Court below. The motion il
| overr1lcd. ATS
r. ~ MN Justice Sheldon.-as st. LouIs + Southeast
| arm Railroad Company '. William Dornan-Appoa
| from Hamilton. Diminuon Of record is enggcsted
knd mutton made for writ Of certfornr. Tha motto,
will be allowed but the nprollee will Eco 70 II That h
return IL made In tlo we ehnll not suffer the hear
| ting to be delayed for want Of the roturu.
| NEW MOTIONS.
SO. John curt'ce '. Joseph Dcasley-Appcal fro1
jackson. Motion to dIsn!aa apresl for want Of ab
| Btraot and briefs. Appeal Dismissed accordingly.
.l77,,. United States Expreaa Company Y. A. II
.Meints-Appeal from St. Clair. MoIion to dlau,is
appeal tie ground that tho order OF tho Court To
! low had not beon Compiled with by appellant.