, 1886-03-23
THE INJUNCTION CASE.
The Arguments on the Amended
Bill of Complaint.
The Question Involved Thoroughly
Discussed.


The amended hin of complaint in the
Warren ct al Injunction hill was filed ves.
terd,v Forenoon AID ~ m tho mat.
Ter cam. II, eor ARGUMENT before Chief
.Jps,ice Iacev
Tho amended hill m,Los no reC.rence to
tbe question oc tho ~lec,l;,v Of the ~lev;sla-
,pre II simnlv acts forth TIM, the aop,-
nlainants are NJ Az vom;rg and
taxnavsrs in tho Same and reeers IN the
defendants describing them in their
official canac;tv and states that ,hev also
arc residents OTTO E-ollow;rc the en-
tion or rather the ureliminarv a%llega-
tions in the hill comes the statement in
reG.rence IN ,bo two ;,oms in Tho onnro.
%priation hill one for "a 5o7. N for the 70.
;mburs;ng or Governor Warren e,r monev
which il is claimed. has already been
exnendsd and FIR So AOo asa CONTINGENT
fund for the ensuing two years. Follow
ing the allegations. in regard to these two
amendments came the allegation that the
legislature had no powe, To make these
appropriations. The concluding portion
of the bill of complaint charged that the
respondents had ~confederated together for
the purpose of drawing this amount from
the territorial treasury after which allie
CATION came the PRAYER for relief. etc. At
2p. IN. Chief Justice Lacey called the
case. and both sides announced that they
were ready to proceed with the argument.
United States Attorney A. c. Campbell
and Judge William Ware Peek. appeared
in behalf OF the compliments, and w. W.
Corlett and Willis Nandevanter for the re-
spondents, Judge Peck opened the
argument on the part Of the compliments
and proceeded at considerable length to
dwell upon the subject Of territorial legis-
lative power. He contended hat there
were many restrictions thrown around the
authority Of a territorial legislature and
that especially in the matter of expendi-
ture, congress by law has provided that
Wyoming shall have a governor and a
legislature, and has also provided what
the pay and compensation of each should
be. and having SO provided that very fact
will prevent the Legislative authority from
adding to or increasing il In the course
of his argument, Judge Peck cited High
on iniunctions and several other authori-
ties, and also referred at some length to
the late opinion Of Assistant General
Montgomery, which he claimed was not
strictly speaking authority, still it was
entitled 10 great credit
W W. Corlett. on the mart of the de-
Gsndants made an argument Of nearly an
hour n I'D a balfs duration. and dIscoursed
the subject in all its phases. He conten-
ded tbat the hill al eomplaint must nave
been drawn under n misannrebension of
the law. for alleging as il did that the de-
PENDANTS. Smith and Stewart, were about
10 issue the warrants for the two amounts
mentioned in the bin the fac. had been
overlooked that the warrants eould only
be issued after an itemized bill had been
presented 70 the auditor and by him al
lowed. In other words, the defendants
were not in that situation by which they
could be restrained from doing an act
which under the law they as vet have no
right to do. Mr.. Corlett made but two
points in his argument-the one lust mem
toned and the other. and main point. the
one on which the defendants mostly RELY.
being that while the laws of the United
States as found in the revised statutes
prohibit the legislature from increasing
the salary and compensation of cover
nors. there was no such restriction in re-
gard to the contingent fund. In support
of this view. the attorney referred TO Sec
tons 1855 1858 and 1885 of the United
States revised statutes. He also referred
to the opinions of Assistant Attorney
General Montgomery. and proceeded to
point out some defects in the same-as
for instance tbat some of the sections of
the statutes upon which the opinion
was based. had been repoaled.
United States Attorney A. C. Camp
bell made the closing argument on the