Ottumwa weekly courier. (Ottumwa, Wapello County, Iowa) 1872-1899, 1878-11-06

section 767 means, but taking the two
sectione together there can be NO uues-
ton about II. The law didt intend
there should be two shcriffs.--i
Section 767 did not intend that the
deputy should be sheriff and at the
same time the board Of supervisors
appoint . sheriff.
There might be Q time between
which there would be NO appointment
by the board and unless the deputy
continues to act there would be mo-
body to exercise the duties Of sheriff,
but under this section the deputy has
authority to act-the Same authority
he derived from Mr.. Stewart origin
ally, but In 20 doing his acts would be
valid because he was deputy sheriff,
but that would not make him de fac.
to sheriff Of the county, he derives his
authority from the fact that he has
been deputy sheriff. Both these stat
utes should be construed 90 that both
may have full force and effect. This
disability may refer to many things =
1t may refer to disability pending the
appointment Of the board, and II 20,
then he would have power to act un-
der such circumstances.
So fer ~ this question Of color Of
title 10 concerned, % to Mr.. McCue
being de fdct0 sheriff and thereby get
ting color Of title to the Office Of sher-
if, don't think he can do that-I
don't think he can get color Of title to
the Office ofsherif by discharging the
duties of the Office 40 deputy, holding
his appointmentas deputy. While his
acts would be valid while he 10 depu-
ty, or de facto deputy, it presents
different question % to whether
he was an incumbent of. the office
1T is further than being On in
cumbent Of the Office Of deputy
He was in the Office Of deputy and the
suspension Of the principal, termin-
ated his authority de jure, but II
did mot terminate and prevent him
from doing acts which would be val
Id 20 to third parties; because he IL in
possession Of the Office and discharg-
ing it, duties would not render him
de facto that officer he never had the
Office, but is merely . deputy dis
charging his duties % deputy. Judge
Knapp's order did not determine who
shall be recognized whether the dep.
uty or the appointee of the board, II
IL did, I should not hesitate for mo-
ment to follow his ruling. But I find
w. d. McCue simply exercising and
dischargiDg the duties Of deputy
sheriff. I also find Thomas Bedweil
appointed by the board Of superve-
vis0rs to that Office, % provided by
iaw-that he has given bond and
4 nu lifsa Al : rh ada, .~A xA.x j..
10 entitled to be recognized by this
court % sheriff Of the county. Tha,
is my judgment.
\ do not determine whether W. D.
McCue has any right, or any author.
ity to discharge the duties of deputy
sheriff after that appointment; IL il
not necessary for, me to determine
that question here. Nor do ! under.
take to Dust Mr.. McCue from his Office
that he holds, or to say that he 10 NO,
deputy sheriff of the county, or to say
that he has not authority to discharge
the duties Of deputy still. That ques
ton 10 not before me. I find two gon.
tlemen each. claiming to be sheriff Of
the county. i find one Of them hal
been appointed sheriff and the Other
has not. And Mr.. Bedwell will O
course, be recognized % sheriff and
the proper officer of this court.
I This order does not put Mr.. Bed
we'll in possession OF the jail or thu
!. papers of the Office or any Of thos,
papers belonging to 1t. With that
have nothing to do. And do no
propose to make any order with ref
ference to that. don't propose t
determine whether he has right II
: the jail and the control of 1t, o.
whether he has right to the paper
!. in the hands Of w. d. McCue or not
but I simply recognize Mr.. Bedwel
- sheriff Of the county, authorized t.
ill that Office during the suspension
of Mr.. Stewart" 'f- We