The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1888-02-19
THE THREE JUDGES.
The Ogden City Treasury Case
Farrell Gets There.
BRIXEN BEATS THE BANK
The Church Case-A New TriaI Or
dered in the Wright-As cheim Case
Other Legal Light

The Supreme Court of the Territory
met at 3 p NJ, yesterday, the most i'm
portant opinions delivered being those
in the case of the People VS.. Andrew
Cation, which will be found in another
part of this issue. and in the case OF
William Farrell VS.. James Pingree is as
follows:
At the general election held in Au-
gust, 1884, one Robert P. Harris was
elected to che office OF county Jree surer
of Weber County, under a statute nl.n
established the office, and provided thar
the term of Office of the county treas
urers should be four years and unit
their successors should be elected and
qualified. Subsequently, on the 18th
Jay of March, 1856, nearly two years
after Harris election, the statute was
amended by striking out the word
| four, and substituting the word two
i'll lieu thereof"
AT THE GENERAL ELECTION
in August, 1856, tn, defendant (Pin-
gree) was elected to the Office of Treas
urer of said county, for the term of two
years, upon the theory that Harris
term had expired at Inat time. undtr
the statute as amended in the preceding
! March. Harris, having been elected
! for term of four years, had two wears
yet TO run at that time, unless he
amendment Of March Ii, 1886, mad de-
| pilyed him OF the TWO years subsequent
10 the date of Pingree's election. Pin
gree entered upon the discharge of the
du es of the office under his election
il August, 1886 although
HAIR is HAD NOT RESIGNED
nor been removed from office. III
February following the date OF
Pingree's taking the office, Harris did
No on, was appointed after Harris
death, TO till the office, but Pingree
continued in it. At the general cleo
ton in August, 1887 the plaintiff was
elected TO said office, and received his
certificate, aud was duly quail fec to
enter upon the discharge OF the duties
OF the office. dema lded the pos. ession
Of the books. papers and insignia of the
office from the defendant VITO was then
in possession of them. The defendan:
having refused to deliver them up TO
him, the plaintiff brought this action.
and upon the hearing of the case, the
| Judgment being for the plaintiff, the
defendant appealed to this court.
We learn from the appellants biief
that he claims The Judgment of the
lowe court to have been ERRONEOUS, for
the reason that the enactment of the
1l;h of March, 1885. operated at once
as vacation of the office ther. nelu by
! Harris, saving tn the occupant the
riehC to hold the office until mis- success
sor should be elected and qualified.
! The language of the br eff is. that the
effect of the amendment of March 18th.
| 1886. striking out the word four, was to
repeal he terms of Office of all county
trtasurers then in Office, so far
as any term of years then uu-
expired might be, and simply
tn leave them to continue in offics, or
no j over until their successors soould
oo elec.ed aud qualified" and the
defendant fLrther contends that upon
this theory, the fixed term of Harris
expired at the taking effect of the
amendment, or repeal on the 11th of
March, 1886, and that therefore Harris
could only hold until mis- successor
should be elected and qualified after that
dat, ich he claims took plac, at the
| August eiec ion M 1895. EN- the
defendant was elected To tue fiji -, an
! therefore uua'iti-d
| Ihe-eT 5
NJ TACArt ~ Of THE OFFICE
- express term, by the enactment o.
| March, 1885. The question then arises,
vas there su h vacation by implica
ton? There was no repeal of the act
GIea ing the office. The am ,ndment
d a On 7 wi b ne length OF the term
of Uiice. 1t left all the residue
NJ the STATUTE intact, and in full force
1t the Legislature Intended to vacate
the office, that intention must clearly
appear before q court IS warranted ia
saying it exists. The defendant claims
that such intent is shown in the enact
meat declaring that the old statute "iS
hereby amended bv striking out the
word four" But ali that the striking,
out clause vacates is the word -four
Nothing else is retended IN the act to
be vacated. That word IS dropped out
of the statute, but the Office is not
dropped out. It is left to stand as it
stood before. one word -four" being
repealed, stricken out. and the residue
of the statute being allowed 10 stand :;
Harris would have found himself. upon
the adoption of the amendment. on the
18th of March, 1886, in an office, the
term of which
HAD NO END
His term would have been heightened,
instead of lessened by the repeal, or
"striki1g out the word four" and
there could have. been no sort OF
ground for saying that under such
circumstances any one else could have,
by any election or appointment, better
right to the Off e. He had been duly
elected to it nearly two years prior to
that time, had not been removed, ncr
had he resigned and the Office had not
been abolished. Only the time limit
had been removed. But the true rule
of construction is to take the whole
statute, and consider all of its parts to-
gether, and not to take fraction, and
consider that by itself. The amenda-
tory enactment of the 18th March, 1899
not only contained the words .'strickeL
{l,o br1k = 81