The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1881-05-21

nv the police force in tbs history OF the city.
Tbe amount of fines worked ont IN the
streets WAS no. lost, Tor good sefVica was
done in that direction.
Tho MnyoraIty QUO arranto Case,
The proceedings were opened yesterday
morning by Judge White, who concluded
the argument for the relstor on the question
of res adiudicaIs. The judge promised by
saving that the only question as 10 the
exclusive Jurisdiction OF the city council. He
admitted that all bodies of that character
necessarily had the right to judge of the
qualifications of their own members--that at
every meeting there was recognition of
their membership. He said further that
there was no appeal as such from the council,
but denied Mr.. Gibbs classification Of juris
diotions, alleging that there was another
kind, to,wit A supervisory Jurisdiction
reached by the writ of quo warranto,
when appeals and writs of error
would not lie. He read from
Judge Dillon on the subject of extraordi>
nary remedies invoked for tribunals composed
of mtn nsk,iled in the law, and contel ded
that it would be monstrous for such men to
try intricate points of law. He argued that
the principles of law governing quo war
rsnto gave the pow,r to iuquire into the whole
matter in dispute, and that the right 10
inquire gave the right to conclude; that in
maadamus there was only an order of the
court, but in this proceeding an Unlimited
right of Investigation; thaLthere was but one
exception, and that whpro the council was
Inv, sed with unequivocal and exclusive juris-
dicton Quo warrsnto implied that there
was no concurrent Jurisdiction, writ of error
or appeal,
The question hero, Judge White argued,
va, not VINE r Stone should have the office,
bus whether Hunt should hold it. This
writ comes from the people, AS in England
itcane from the king; that al! tho state lad
to do was to make out a prima facie case
and defendant was forced to show by what
tenure he held the otfice-thst in that view
OF the case the plea of res adudicata would
not lie, as in this quo warranto proceeding
not only were the parties different from
those before the council, but also tho sub
ject matter of controversy. He quoted
Penn'a. case showing that rules regarding
legislatures did not apply to such bodies rs
counclls-one beng separate and co.
ordinate branch of tho ovrnment, and the
other but an inferior tribunal with limited
powers
Theiudge then argued that if these princi.
piles prevailed everywhere else they should
be recognized in Texas, and referring to the
single exception mentioned by Judge Banks
dale, said it was not as counsel on the other
side had stated, Texas case, but one from
California. Referring to the case Of Dochetty
We. Parker, where il WAS laid down that
''there is no mode of revising tho judgment
of the court under the statute Hart. dig,
9l9) in cases of contested elections for
county officers; it is, therefore conclusive"
90 argued that the whole policy of the state
had changed since that decision,
and that the reasons and conditions OF tho
law being gone the binding effect of the dc.
cision was also done away with Tho writ
of quo wsrrantO had been since engrafted 10
our jurisprudence and even the statute itself
changed. He commended that 70 give the
council exclusive jurisdiction 1t must be ex-
pressed in the charter, and that this writ in
no wise infringed upon their rights but was
supervisory to control the action not only of
part Of councils proceedings but over all
He concluded by referring to the Milliken
case at Weatherford, where tho court held
as follows: "Conceding that the legislature
could confer lawfully this jurisdiction on the
board of aldermen, and that there was no
right to reverse their action by appeal, writ
oferror or certiorari, then their Judgment
would be final unless it was subject to be
impesehed for some cause which would
render it absolutely void" And commended
that that expression of the court was purely
unessen,ial to the question involved.
as had been argued by Judge Bsrkg.
dale. The government of Tho civ
of Wea,herford /, special tribunal TO do.
termine on tho removal of officers, and in M
way analogous in its power to that gran,ed
in general acts OF interpretations
The iu ige's effort was able and elaborate
eyinring perfect acquaintance with the law
of the case, as we'll as skill in its application.
The decision on tho demurrer 10 this plen
of "slresdy decided" was given by the,udpe
after some examil alton of au,ho,ities over.
ruling the demurrer, and declaring the action
of the council to be final and conciusiye.
He quoted from High, on EXTRAORDINARY
Remedies, saving that decisions of csnyassins
boards were only prims facie, and not con-
elusive, and to the note where the author
referred TO I'd and 3dJohnson Reports, where
il was held that the duties Of can.
vassers were only ministerial, and their
Certificate nrin,a facie Rut this bo ea;d