The Portland daily press., 1881-01-05

cision, sis one who has the reputation Of
being the officer he assumes to be and yet is
not good officer in point of law" Our ow n
Supreme Court of Maine defines him as
'one who actually performs the duties of
an office, with apparent right, and under
claim and color of an appointment, or
election" The distinction between officers
detQcto and de jurc has been recognized in
England at least since the time of Edward
~, when the Princes of the House of Ian
caster were styled, in the language of the
statute, slate Kings of England success
sively. in dede and not of right" Henry
vi was regarded as King de .tdcto, al
though he had been declared usurDer by
act of Parliament; and treasons against
him were punishable as capital offences,
during the reign of his successor.
Courts in this country, in numerous de-
cisions, have repeatedly upheld the same
doctrine. There is, in the 37th volume
OF Maine Reports, decision by the
late Judge Howard bearing directly
upon this question. The case is that of
Brown against Lunt, in which th plaintiff
claimed title to a farm in Westbrook by vir-
tue of an attachment. The defendant put
in a deed of conveyance, showing that the
farm was not the property of the debtor.
This deed purported to be acknowledged be-
fore Samuel Fessenden as a justice of the
peace. But it was shown that at the time
of the acknowledgment Fessendens COM
mission had expired, and it was urged that
the deed was therefore invalid. The Court
held otherwise, and the validity of the deed
was sustained. 1t was decided also that
the principle which holds the official acts of
de fdcto justice of the peace valid so far as
they affect third parties, "apples to all pub
lie officers, judicial or ministerial, whether
claiming by election or appointm ut; and
whether holding undera defective Ii lie with
in the term. or in possession, and exercising
the Office under color of right, beyond the
term affixed to il by law" "The law is too
well settled to be discussed" says the Court
appealing to the decision of Chancellor
Kent in People Us. Collins and to other high
authorities, "that the acts of an officer de
Jfdcto, done by virtue of his Office, are as val
id, so far as the rights of the public and
third persons who have an in
terest in the acts are concerned, as
if he were an officer de jure; and it is
as well settled, that neither his title to the
office, nor his official acts, can be indirectly
called in question, in suit to which he is
not party. His Office and authority may
be valid as to others, though invalid as to
himself. These doctrines are held to be
founded in public policy and convenience,
and necessary to the maintenance of the
supremacy and execution of the laws and
for the protection and security of individual
rights. Hence the law favors the official
acts of those in reputed authority, and the
rights of those claiming title or interest
through their proceedings"
Reading this decision our correspondent
may dismiss all apprehension of troubles to
come from The administration of Govera-
or de fdcto. Even should the plan he sug-
gests be adopted the title of the Governor
would be as questionable. Is it not better,
then, to adopt the least cumbersome plan,
and to declare Gen. PlasGed elected by plu-
ralty vote?