The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1889-10-29
BEGINNING OF The FRAY
Silver Bow Republicans EndeaVof to
Retafd tho NandamuS Case.
scarc~ly Anything A-ceCsnpltshesi ~ Ses-
teriay's proceeding~-A Large Audi
dience which I~cludcd sOmn~
Very Prominent Men.

Special tai the standard.
BUTTE, Oct. 2a.-Thc county ~canvasss,rs
OF Silver How county. 10y their attorneys,
appeared before Judge dc Wolfe in the
district court at 10 o'clock this morning,
To answer the writ Of mandamus issued 10y
the people OF the Territory Of Montana.
J. j. McHattou,~ democratic candidate for
district judge, hTinR relator. The man
damtls gave the defendants the alterna-
tive of counting thc vote, of the :Ath pre-
cinct or cause why they should
not count il. They preferred tai show
cause why IL should not he counted and
their attorneys were the cstinaablc Thomir
son, Campbell, and the cr,iditc Judge
Knowles. The progress OF the great argyll
mant which began at I'D o'clock was
Witnessed 10y u courtroom OF Interested cit
izcns, among whom were &. w. Staplcton,
w. Y. Pembcrton. Warren Toolc. w. A.
Clark. ]. F.. Forbis, -. T. Hauscr, Shelley
Turtle. Sam Word, n. w. Mcconnell. J.
X. Boarunan. w. Scallon. e. w. ~t;oodale,
L. &. Power, A.. j. Seligman. Major Ma
ginnis, NJ. Kirkpatrick, r. T.. Corbctt, &.
r. Booth, J. w. Ferguson, j. w. Rittcn-
house, j. II. Lynch, Jerry Rosch. j. w.
McHenry, 4. Is. Nolan, county attorney of
Lewis and Clarke county. County Attor-
ney-clect Baldwin, George Haidurn, w.
l.. Ferguson, Of Denver, NJ. l.. Winds, Col.
Il. O'Leary, of Anaconda. AMI most of the
candidates on both Legislative tickets.
hV NSeAtb VIZ - 90" Nv ~
promises to- keel, the matter in court for
many days. The republicans at the very
start planted their feet OH u qnIibble of
the most technical nature. They
..The people or the first three
words Of the writ of inandamus- and bc-
gan with AN obstinncy which indicated AN
intention of fighting through tn the finish
on every point inventive brains
The writ of mandate was read at the
opening OF ne court; Then Thompson
notion: That the court dismiss the PRO
cccding. ON the. ground that there IL no
the name of any sovereignty known tn the
law. A proceeding of this naturs. always
savors Of IL great public necessity. We
find this court assembled one week earlier
than the original time set for the Novcn-
bcr term. Hence there must have been
urgent necessity for the charges. We ask
that the court permit all the time neces-
sary to state our case. to- this court. since
we have been called on in advance of
by surprise. We ask the indulgence of the
court and know we will receive il.
"This writ of mandamus is II very an
cicnt order. known as the highest preroG-
ative written In the ancient law. and WAS
only issued ia the name of kings. In this
country il has been permitted TO utilize
private remedy. Nothing is asked for by
IL. Mediation, the relator, that could not
UikNeu ~ hShet uS ~eI Dy huy eitIZel III
Montana. but the writ is WRONG i'm the
manner i'm which it has been drawn. up:
There Is no sovereignty in the people of
are not the sovereigns at q territory. but
the sovcrcigns Of a state. The sovereign
known here is the territory Of Montana
not the people of the territory Of Mon
tana.' Mr.. McHatton asks that the re-
iectcd vote he connted ON al! officers and
ncccssity- which must emanate
from the Sovereignty itself"
This pctition." said Judge DE Wolfe.
"is u temporary mandate and IL issued i'm
the name of the people of Montana. You
claim that the local sovereignty is not the
should have rum as the territory Of Mon
t,na instead % the people OF Montana. Is
MIR. Campbell said that was what he was
trying Ia get at.
"TGe m~andamus." he said, .is not is
sued in the name of n sovereign power.
According To chapter q, section 4:O. this is
an extraordinary legal remedy, and rtnne-
dies 10y mandate must bc issued in tho
not "a condition as i'm ordinary civil rights.
but one that involves sovereign power.
Another objection is that the Inandamus
must show the precise thing which the
defendants are required to do. We he
lieve the writ is without authority, is no
writ. and should he discharged"
Judge said in answer To Mr..
Campell: "This writ is i'm the name of
the people, and by what kind OF definition
the defendants can distinguish between
territory is not known. The gov
m should run i'm the name of the
people of Montana"
as there any law" inquired the court,
drumming as the people of Montana! ~ l
am aware that the designation of sovcr-
eighty differs i'm different states. Where
il the authority i'm his territory for the
proper designation being the people of
Montana" -"
1.-The authority is only by analogy said
MIR. Met on There is no statute for
the form. I'm the case of Drew vs.. Nc
Lynn i'm Florida the writ is IN the name of
the people, and every writ of the. kind is
i'm the am form. Ii the court thinks
there is any ground tn this objection, we
would ask to amend 10y striking out the
term The people Of"
Judge Knowle said: ~ readily con-
ccdc that the question has followed the
regular form of proceedings in some
other states or governments. But il is not
the proper form i'm this territory. There
IL no cas-" in court until the writ is prop
crly issued"
"ln the absence of any statutory pro-
vision AS To what the sovereignty is i'm this
territory. Is there anything To show that it
stands with the territory rather than with
the people of the territory ~ inquired the
court.
ut stands with the territory" said Mr..
Knowles. 'because the territory has the
power and the govcrrInnent."
"If congress-" said the court, Neither i'm
the original act or elsewhere has dcsig-