The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1889-02-17
BATES BOUNCED.
THE THIRD CONGRESSIONAL DIS.
TRicr IN THE SUPREME COURT
Tonncssec's Highest Tribunal Decides
That II Has no Power In the Con.
tested Election Case and Refuses
20 Interfere In the Matter.

Special Dispatch 10 Tho Appeal
NASHVILLE Tenn. Feb. ,G=Thc public
has been awaiting with interest for NOR,
than month the decision II the suprcm,
Court oi the ease Of Greed L. Bates w. Rob
cri J.. Taylor Governor but usually known
o. The Rate, Evans ease. 4 hush came over
the courtroom Immediately upon the an.
nouncomont by Justice Caldwell Of this case
this morning. II will be remembered that
this suit was brought by Greed q.
Bates 10 restrain Gov. Taylor from issuing
a certificate of election a. II Clay Evans
10 the fiity-Gri Congrcs. from the Third
Congressional District Of Tennessee. The
bill was filed in the Chlnccry Court Of David.
son County by vcrirccs 4 Ncrrccs aud IIill
and Cranberry, attorneys Tor Mr. Rates.
The Chancellor decided that bis court hal
no jurisdiction IN the matter. aud Mr. BATES.
by counsel appealed 10 the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court iu its decision. after
rccIiIug The history uf the case, says We
have uD hesitation ln holding that the courts
have np jurisdiction a. compel the Governor
10 deliver a. complainant the certificate
claimed by him, no murU have they the
power tu fCsimiu him from issuing % rDriin.
cate 10 the other applicant NJ the
Governor cannot BE- compelled by mlndn-
mus 90 deliver certificate ui election
"a one person. it follows that be- cannot boz
restrained hy Injunction from delivering it
to another person. iur ihc nature ui the act
Ia bc performed by him is precisely the
same Zoo one ease aH in the other and the
same conditions operate tp defeat The iuris.
dirii0n ~ The courts in both Instances,
cuurr'liuF iur the slko ui the Argument that
ihr Governor could not. in thr iir.t Instance
have been compelled iu give The certificate
iu complainant or prevented from giving
% 10 Evans Tie very able and learned
counsel NJ complainant go further aud
insist With great force and plusib.liiy.
that ihU Chief Executive of the State
may be- ,uioiuod from doing nn unlawful
things that under The facts disclosed in
the bill The nci sought tU b. restrained is un-
lawful. aud that being unlawful ~ per.
iDnnnn,1 mny De- prevented by Injunction.
The essence ~ those facts o. that the Gov.
cruor and Secretary oi State together reached
the conclusion from the returns that the
complainant had been elected. and there.
fore prepared signed. attssicd aud isturd a
certificate showing that fact. aud that bo.
iurc thc delivery " the certificate. The Gov.
otnur changed hIs mind. decided that Evans
was elected and without the concurrence
Of thr Secretary ui state. wns about a. issue
n NfININfNNf w lNNNH MNNW NIllH NIII was
nlri if they have such authority ns 10 one
status imposing nn obligation upon him
they have it ns ip nll such statutes and With
rsprci to 900 requirements made Of him hy
the Constitution a. we'll. Such q view
would pat thr responsibility Of the Gov.
cnort office upon The Judiciary, aud yirtu.
ally make him subject to the direction of
the courts loo every action ho miRht take.
thereby working q substantial destruction Of
one department Of thc State government
and rtpr, sentative u its functions by an
other contrary io thc ggnIua, spirit aud let.
trr VI the Con .iuiIon. The question u
jurisdiction being conclusive, d lus not
been deemed important 10 decide Nhslhcr,
under the peculiar language. the DELIVERY u
the certificate made out fof the complainant
wa. necessary 10 invest him will a title 10
The office nor whether sitter the slrn.
Inc. ntltsiiug and sealing oi HAT
certificate thr Governor ruulh uEhiiuiiy rC.
consider biz action and Without the concur.
vnco % thc s't.igy " h'1lc, iw.no 10
Eyln, certificate Blt d lllo l1w hr, NJ
claimed iu tlIe Liil tri in tlu ufFumCnt that