The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1888-07-14
JUSTICES IN A CONTEST.
THURSDAYS ELECTION CLAIMED
TO BE ILLEGAL.

Justice Naughtin Contests Mr.. Endres'
Election in the First District on the
Ground That the Grand Jury Had No
Right to Elect at the June Term-The
Case to be Heard in the Superior
Court To-Day.
new feature was injected into the jus
tees canvass yesterday. When Justice
elect Eudres applied for bis orders, he was
confronted by an objection by J. r. Saussy,
ESQ, representing the defeated candidate,
Justice Naughtin, on the ground that the
election OF ex-officio justices should have
been by the grand jury at the March term.
There was no objection raised when
Justice Waring Russell, Jr., asked for his
orders, which was granted at once The
counsel for Justice Naughtin holds that the
grand Jury at the June term had no right
TO elect the ex-officio justices. If this
claim is valid one, it invsli-
dates the election of all the ex-oficio
Justices recommended by the superior court
grand jury, and the ex-officio Justices
having been elected for four years, if there
be no legal successors, the offices lapse, and
only those justices elected by the people
will hold.
1t is claimed that the ex-offlcio justices,
being appointed for four years, cannot and
will not hold over until their successors are
elected and qualified.
THE RIGHT TO RECOMMEND.
The question arose at the March term as
TO the right of the grand jury at that term
to recommend the ex-officio justices, and the
appointment of the candidates was sent
in. but the court held that il
was not within the province of that
grand jury to take action, and when the
grand jury at the present time organized,
the court, in instructing it as to its duties,
among other things instructed it to recon-
mend for appointment the ex-otiicio justices.
This it did and the legality Of the proceed
ing was conceded by the contestant who
presented his name to the jury TO be bal
loted for.
Justice Naughtin rests his case upon a
provision of the statutory laws of Georgia,
approved Oct. Is, 1885, which declares
THAT from and after the passage Of this
act the governor shall not issue commits
sion to any notary public and ex-officio
justice Of the peace, unless it shall appear
from the order Of appointment that such
appointment was made at the term Of the
court next preceding the vacancy, or at
some succeeding term after such vacancy
has occurred Georgia laws Of 1885,
page 95.
THE CONTESTANTS CLAIMS.
Justice Naughtin's counsel, Messrs. J. r.
Saussy and p. j. OConnor, claim that
this means that the election should have
been held at the March term, as the term
next preceding the vacancy" Mr. En-
dres will ask the court for an order,
through his counsel, Capt. Robert Fall
giant, holding that the grand jury did, in
fact, elect at the term preceding the va
cancy which will occur on July 81. That
the court in ruling at the March
term that the grand jury had no
right to go into the election of the
ex-officio justices ruled right, ana that the
accommodation of the court at the
present term, to the grand jury TO elect, is
in harmony with the statutory provision,
and that its recommendation is valid in
law and in fact. They will also hold that if
the election of one can be challenged, all
can be challenged, and that the fact that
Justice Russell got his order at once, will
not, per Sc, entitle him to continue to
serve as justice of the peace if any one of
the other successful candidates are chal-
lenged TO show cause why they should hold
the Office.
WHAT JUSTICE NAUGHTIN SAYS.
Justice Naughtin was seen by a MORN
ING NEWS reporter, and while not disposed
10 argue the case, but referring the matter
to his counsel, he went so far as TO say that
his action is well grounded, and that his
counsel had taken the position that the
grand juries had no right to recommend,
but that the grand juries of the June term
had no right to enter into an election.
Solicitor General duBignon is quoted as
preferring that the matter be relocated to
the superior court for adjudication, and
volunteering the opinion that the election
is valid, and chat the court cannot consist
emily rule otherwise.
Judge Adams will hear the argument in
the case at 8 o'clock this morning, aud if
his decision is consistent with the practice
which has obtained in the court the PARTIES
elect will all obtain their orders