Idaho semi-weekly world. [volume] (Idaho City, Idaho Territory) 1875-1908, 1889-04-12
Observation-Disclosures.
In the Supreme Court of the Terri

The People of the United States
etc., ex. rel.
John German, appellant, VS.. c. G
Havird, respondent:
Proceedings in the nature OF quo
warranto.
l. An action under act of January
80, 1885, to try title to an office, to
which there are several claimants, is
one of legal, and not of equitable
cognizancc. The issues in such ac-
ton or proceeding are legal ones; and
the trial of such issues by jury is a
constitutional right of the parties.
2. That part of Section ,536, said
act, providing that actions Of this ma
tute "shall he tried by the judge Of
the District Court, at chambers, and
without the Intervention Of jury" is
held unconstitutional and void.
This action is under All act OF the
Territorial Legislature OF Idaho,
passed January 80, lSS5-being sec
tons 534-542 inclusive its pur-
pose to try the title OF the respond
ent to the Office of Sheriff Of Boise
county.
1t has the usual provisions for OBJ
tanning jurisdiction of the parties,
the formation of issues by pleading,
the trial of those issues, and the rem
dition of judgment, with the further
privilege OF appeal to this Court.
The proceeding is called by the
act " an action and it is so treated
by both parties, and it must be so
considered for the purposes of this
appeal. Its purpose, however, is to
attain the end reached by writ of
quo warranto, at common law, or a
writ of right for the king, against
him who improperly claimed or
usurped an Office. Such writ is not
suited to our form Of government and
in America it has fallen into disuse;
and statutory proceedings in the
nature of = writ of quo warranto,
have in most OF tho States, if not in
all, taken its place. Those statutes
vary in the extent OF the remedy
which they furnish, some, as in Ala
bama. Stat. Ala. Feb. 3, 1910, Sec.
A. mako OF the Court a nero inquisi-
ton to ascertain the regularity OF the
election. These have been held not
to confer judicial power upon the
Court as in . suit at common law,
hence, that exercise of the right to
hear and decide, is rather in the char
acter OF supervisor of elections, and
do not require the intervention of
iury. In other States this statutory
proceeding has appropriated more
nearly in its scope to the writ OF quo
warranto, still retaining the criminal
form of that writ, but using it as a
civil remedy only. In our own Ter
ritory, our Legislature has gone
much further and includes within ITS
act the full scope of an information,
in the nature Of writ OF quo war
ranto, including its criminal features
and power to punish. Such informa-
ton, in the nature OF writ OF quo
warranto, was properly criminal
method of prosecution, as well to
punish the usurper, by fine for the
usurpation of the franchise, as to Gust
him, or seize the Office for the Crown.
Paine on elections, no.
This law not only provides for SUI
pervision OF elections, and the cor
rsction OF errors, but it goes further;
and places in the Court, unmistaka-
BILE judicial powers. Sec. SAL pro-
vides "thst when defendant, against
whom such action has been brought,
is adjudged guilty of usurplng or in
truding into, or unlawfully holding
any Office, franchise or privilege,
Judgment must be rendered that the
be excluded from the Of
fee, franchise or privilege, and that
he pay the costs of the action. The
Court or the Judge may also, in its,
or his discretion, impose upon the de-
PENDANT fine not erceeding too thou
sand dollars.
Here are questions not merely as
to regularity of an election, but also
Of personal guilt or innocence, fol-
lowed by pecuniary consequences, of
no small moment. IL aims not only
1t a OWL remedy, but also at crimi-
nal trial, personal punishment, and |
pecuniary fine and loss. The act of
wilful intrusion into public Office,
to which one has not been elected, is