Weekly commercial herald. (Vicksburg, Miss.) 1884-18??, 1885-10-02

49, @0ANAAN -
warranto proceedings Of james A.
Hinckley against DOrman B. Eaton
Leroy D. Thomans, John M. Gregory,
civil service commissioners, came
up before Judge Wallace in the
United States circuit court
this morning. Hinckley asks leave
to begin an action to remove the
commissioners and abolish the COM
mission, on the ground of uncoustitu-
tionality. The courtroom was crowd
ed with friends and enemies of civil
service reform.
District Attorney Dorsheimer and
Dorman B. Eaton appeared for the
commissioners, while Morris S. Miller
represented MI. Hinckley.
In the opening Mr.. Dorsheimer said
that the case was an important one,
and as all the parties interested were
present, he thought it should be dis
posed of.
Judge Wallace decided to hear the
motion after the call of the regular
calendar.
Mr.. Miller, when Hinckley's case
was called, demanded to know who ap-
peared for the defendants?
81 appear for all those defendants"
said the district attorney. "and by the
direction of the president Of the Uni
ted States"
Mr.. Miller objected to the commits
sioners being represented by a govern
ment official, as the United States has
not any real status in the case.
Mr.. Dorsheimer then moved that the
court decide whether or not the ar gu
ment should be confined only to the
constitutional jurisdiction of the
court. He said he was instructed to
say that he and the encouragement
were prepared to defend the constitu-
tionality of the act appointing commits
%sioners.
Judge Wallace sustained the motion.
In his argument Mr.. Dorsheimer
said: "The relator is a citizen who
seeks the adjustment OF the
Office of commissioners of civil
service reform, because the commits
sioners by the power conferred on
them usurped the rights of the presi-
dent to the appointing power. The
petitioner has no standing in court,
because the right to a quo Warranto
writ only applied to the usurpation
of sovereign rights and the United
States alone could bring such an action
in the United States court, and then
! only through its appointed officers
, Neither had the relator or his attor'
l news been appointed by the at
I torney-general to recommend such ar
b action and the United States alone
had the right to test the constitution
. atty of the act providing for the com
e mission. The rule, as he stated it, he
b said, was fully demonstrated in the
Y case of Wallace vs.. Anderson, the
e question in dispute being as to which
of the two was entitled to a public
I office. The writ Of quo warranto was
applied for by the plaintiff and was
denied by the chief justice of the
. supreme court of the United States
on the ground that the United States
I alone could sue for such writ, and ther
: only through legally appointed officers
r to bring the action properly. He
g maintained that the relator should
E have applied to the executive and tc
n the judicial authority.
! In reply Counsellor Miller contend
I ed, on behalf7of the relator, Hinckley,
that his client had the statutory
o right to apply for the writ, for the cit.
y = izen created the constitution, and
his client as citizen has the RICH
to avail himself of all its benefits, Jh'
a district attorney attempts to snothe.
the petition, though the relator ma
. the right to appeal for redress eithe.
to the executive, legislative or judicla
$. bodies The attorney general, he said
is here representing the president o
= the United States, but [ represent nj
master-a citizen Of this United States
1 demand the right to be hear(
l and if 1 am not entitled tt
Is a writ of quo warranto. theI
el it is the business of tn
- court to find me a remedy, for my
" client is entitled to petition for right
y My argument is almost out of order
Is but this is caused by the vigorous an
unexpected attack made upon me b,
the other side, for it was my intention
d to argue the whole question at once.
n Judge Wallace is conceded tina
st you have the right to petition. Conin
lie yourself by giving me authorities.
4 Mr.. Miller-Do l understand you
to honor wants me to commence M,
ce argument over again?
or Judge Wallace-"Oh, no." Laugh
ter.
The commissioners, Mr.. Miller, COZ
tinued, exercised unwarranted powers
- and Vas directly opposed to the right
be- Of citizens.
ne Judge Wallace can't sit here an
m listen to arguments upon aostrac
propositions. The discussion must b
closed. When you applied for tn
=; writ 1 presumed there would be som
authorities produced, but you hay
GO not submitted any. l think it i
y time to close the discussion
y There is only one case whicI
d could give you a basis for your appli