The Sedalia weekly bazoo. [volume] (Sedalia, Mo.) 187?-1904, 1878-01-01


,ould not preside
1t may be further said that the
trainers Of the constitution and the
people, looking 10 the fact that when
personal objection To the judge existed.
either Oh his interest " his pref
ndice, a change Of venue to another cir
cult on that account was often attended
not only with great expense and incon-
venience to the people and litigants, but
greatly impeded the administration Of
Justice, and in many cases amounted Ia
a denial Of it; believed it was wise to
invest the legislature with the power
to make such provisions as they might
deem Just to cure what was believed tn
he a great evil. II. in the language Of
Story. (secrion 45D. constitutions
are not designed for metaphysical or
logical subtie,ies. for nicely Of express
sion. COR critical propriety. for elaborate
shades Of meaning. or for the exercise
Of philosophical scuteness or judicial
research" If ''they are instruments of a
practical nature. founded on the COM
mon business of life. adapted to com.
mon wants. designed FIR common use.
and fitted for common understandings
If 1.-THE people must he supposed to
read them with the help Of common
sense and cannot he presumed To admit
in them any recondite meaning or ex.
traor,linary gloss" there can be no
question that the legislature had full
power under the constitution to enact
the statute complained AZ. Our atten-
ton has not been called to any other
section of the constitution which de.
MES. either expressly or by implication,
the exercise of such power; and. un'
til it is clearly demonstrated that the
section in question il Sd in conflic,
with some ether provision as not to bt
reconcilable with it, we must hold thu
act valid.
In the case of Turner vs.. Common
wealth, 2 Mt. KY, 6l9, the defend
ant applied for a change o! venue OF
the ground Of the hostility and preju
dice Of the judge, and asked thar al
order be made for the election Of ;
special judge. This was refused. ant
defendant appealed. The constitution
Of that State. after providing. "a our
does, for the election Of the circui
Judges. contains the following clause
1.-The general assembly shall provide
Nv Law for holding circuit courts wheI
from any cause the Judge shall fail 4
attend. or, IL in attendance, canno
properly preside"
Under the power thus conferred tn
legislature Of the State passed a law
containing the following provision, viz.
"When from any cause the judge u
the circuit court fails tn attend. or,
in attendance, cannot properly presid
in a cause or causes pending in sucl
court, the attorneys Of the court VIII
are present shall elect one Of its mem
bers then in attendance to hold tn
court fur the occasion, who shall aG
cor,iingly preside"
1t was held in that case that tn
circuit court committed error in refis
ing to direct and order an election of
special judge in pursuance Of the pr
visions If the statute. and for this erro
the judgment was reversed.
The statute had been in existence j
that State for wears, AMI SD far as "
a-o advised by the repnrrs. its const
tutinnality has never been questlone.
In the case Of Brown vs. Burgar
supra. under provision Of the cons,
tuition Of the State If Indiana. whic
declares that the judges OF the suprem
and circuit courts shall be elected b
the people for six years. but that pr,
vision may be made by law for holdin
the circuit court when the judge ther,
Of shall be temporarily unable to a
tend. the power of the legislature I
enact a law similar to our own seem
to have been conceded.
The cases referred to by counsel j
80 WIS.,. $50. and 3 Bravard. 500, d
not support the views urged by d.
PENDANTS counsel. 1t does not appea
that either the constitution Of WiscnI
sin or of South Carolina conferre
upon the legislature Of either State tn
power to provide by law for holdin
circuit court when the judge from an
cause could not hold it, and the acts j
those cases were declared void becaus
there was no delegation of such powe
in the constitution.
The only other objection to be cor
sidered is to the action of the court j
admitting the evidence Of one HOll
day as preserved in the bill Of exceE
tons taken in q former trial Of tn
cause, (said witness in the meantim
having died. to be read in evidence I
the jury.
The objection made to its introdu,
ton was that no sufficient foundation
had been laid.
1t was shown BY the evidence Of on
Ashring that said Holiday. the vii
ness on the former trial. was dead.
1t was also shown by the evidenc
Of one T. B. Houganout that he KEEP
the minutes of the testimony o.
the former trial, and pre- ,are'
the bill of exceptions from tn
minutes kept by himself and MI
Robinson that wnen the bull of excep
tions was being settled interliuestion
were made BY Mr.. Hardin for defend
ant and by Garrison for the State, tina
the bill Of exceptions was agreed upo'
in the presence Of the judge and attol
news for the State and defendant. tina
he conld not state that it contained al
Of the testimony Of witness.
Judge Cravens who presided on tn
first trial Of defendant and heard tn
witness Holiday testify and VII
signed the bill of exceptions con
to;n;o0 Mia evidonre vras sntrcrlucoA n