The Wichita city eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1872-1883, 1878-08-08
ID BE Eligible Z

IL ne Ellgiblsf
The press of this Congressional dis
ifict has again started the question as
to the eligibility of Judges to Office
during the term for which they were
elected as affected by the strict prohi-
bitIon OF the Constitution. This is not
an original question. 1t was discussed
at the time of the election to Congress
OF judges Goodin and Brown. The
language of the Constitution is capa-
bic OF two constructions: first, that no
Judge is eligible to be chosen for and
10 fH another Office while holding that
OF Judge; in other words. to validate
such Judge election to other than the
Judicial Office during the term for
which he was elected, it would be
necessary for him to resign. The other
and stricter construction is that
mans election as Judge for the term
or four years works his personal disa-
blllty to be elected to or fill any other
official position for that length of
time. In case of ambiguity in our
organic law, the decision of the Su-
preme Court resolves the doubt, and
on this question the Supreme Court,
through its late Chief Justice (King
MANI. seems to have spoken in no un-
certain tone. In the case of the State
OF Kansas on the relation of John II.
Watson VS.. Nelson Cobb, e Kan. Rep.
32) the Court dealt with the question
whether the resignation of the Judge
to accept an appointment as an army
officer did or did not work a vacancy
III the judicial Office, and not whether
the resigning Judge was eligible to
hold the position to which he had
been appointed. But it became neces-
sary for the court to construe the con.
stitutional provision, and it does SO in
language which leaves no loop to hang
a doubt upon. We republish that por-
ton of the opinion of the Court which
is pertinent to the question:
1t is clear that II is not the intention OF this
provision to prescribe rules by which a vacan-
| cy in any of the judicial offices named is to be
ascertained. Eren afterG removal from the res
ignation Of Office. the Justices and Judges NAM
ed are still plainly and eqyiUocaNy bound By tie
constitutional inhibition Until the expiration Of
the term for schsch they toere elected The dis
qualification attaches TO the individual and
not to the incumbent of office. The object
| to lie accomplished by this provision, Is that
our high judicial officers may be removed as
| far as possible from the temptation to use the
power and influence of their position and au-
thority for their own advancement. To pre-
vent their minds from being distracted
| from their legitimate duties by ambi-
| tious hopes and struggles for prefer
ment, to raise them above these political and
| partiZan contests so unbecoming the desired
purity, impartiality and calmness OF the judi
cial character. Its effect is to prevent the ac-
| ceptance OF any other Office by Judge or
| Justice, the term of whose Judicial Office has
| not expired and to render such acceptance poid,
1
| II the Governor of the State. while in office,
| be elected as one OF the Justices OF the Su
| preme Court. his acceptance of the latter posi-
| ton wOuldvacate at once the former but II
one of the Justices OF the Supreme Court
should be elected Governor for term, and
part OF which was included in the term for
which he was elected Justice, he could be held
| ine5igi5ie TO the office Of Governor, and if he
should intrude into the office, ,ooutd be subjsct
TO custer By judicial proceedings. In such case
| in proceeding against such person, the show
| ing that he was elected to and was acting in
that Office Mould be no defense, because the
Constitution absolutely prohibits him from
holding that office, and the attempted defense
would be based upon palpabie violation OF
fundamental law OF the State.
His title aud right to the office OF Justice
| would not be directly affected by his accept
ance OF the Office OF Governor: he would still
! remain in judicial office because the accept
ance OF the other Office would be illegal, void
| and OF no effect.
The ineligibiity OF the Justices and judges
attaches to them as individuals, and not mere
| ly in Office, and extends not ouy while they
hold Office. but during the term for whica they
cers elected.
1t may be asserted that Judges Good
| in and Brown have resigned from the
bench to accept places in Congress,
and have taken their seats. But it
| does not follow that they might not
| have been prevented from tax ing their
seats, if their right to do so had been
fairly and directly contested. No num-
Der of precedents like these can in the
| slightest degree operate to override
| the law, whenever it shall be asserted
| in judicial proceedings.
Judge Peters is candidate for Con-
gress in this district. The term for
which he was elected Judge will not
expire for two years. Should he be
nominated at Wichita his election in
district 50 strongly Republican as this
would be certain. If he received the
| nomination ne wuulu resign OF course.
but would that relieve him of his con.
stitutional disability? The foregoing
| decision is very explicitly to the con.
trary. 1t it clear that the State has
right to impose this disability. Mr..
| Peters himself solemnly agrees to it,
and covenants with the State to abide |
by its terms when he accepts the place
ofJudge, and more solemnly reiterates
| that agreement when he takes path to
support that Constitution in which
| tins provision is UNDECIDED. The Su-
preme Court has in the above decision
declared the most important and salu-
tory reasons for imposing such checks
| upon the ambition of Judges. What
follows? In all human likelihood the
next Congress will be Democratic. 1t
would be only necessary flor the Dem
| ocratic opponent of Mr.. Peters to sug-
gest to Congress that he was by the
| Constitution of his State ineligible to
hold the office, that in the language of |
the Supreme Court his acceptance Of
it while the term of his judicial office |
was unexpired was void, to throw out |
his certificate of election and seat his |
opponent. The House Of Representa-
tives is the judge of the election and |!
qualification ofits own members. In
the contested election case from Colo
RADIO, Belford was thrown out and |
Patterson brought in under nothing |
like such proyocation as would attend |
such contest of Judge Peters right
to seat,
The effect of Judge Peters nominal
ton then would be to have the Third |
District represented by Democrat
for the next two years. Leaving en-
tirely out of sight the question of pro-
priety, aud the still more important
question of faithfullness to his solemn
oath involved in Judge Peters candi-
dacy, we are confronted with this
most practical of questions. While
we have no reason to believe Judge |
Peters will be successful, it is well
that the people of the district should
be foreWarned. -C Commonwealth.