Wood River times. [volume] (Hailey, Idaho) 1882-1915, 1889-03-16

ted facts in the case ct bar. If Cabi-
net officers are thus within the juris.
diction of the court, there is certainly
no ground for an inferior officer of
Territory to claim greater immunity,
simply because he is appointed by the
President. The counsel for
the Secretary PRACTICALLY ADMITS
THIS by saying that State court
cannot issue writ of mandamus to
an officer commissioned by the United
States, except as they are authorized
by the United States. / think. the
counsel is mistaken in this, and that
he will find that while the rule, as to
State courts, is not universal, it
applies only where the officers duties
are purely federal, as in the case of a
United States land officer, but not in
such case as this, where the officer is
not in the service of the United States,
but only an inferior officer of the Ter
ritory; but even if it were otherwise,
this court has federal jurisdiction, as
we'll as territorial.
"The plaintiff has an unquestiona-
BILE power to sue. He was, and still
is, the Speaker OF the House, and as
such had, and still has, the EXCLUSIVE
RIGHT to the performance of the duties
set forth in the complaint. THE
PUBLIC REQUIRES IT OF HIM, even if
no executive or administrative officer
can be found willing to assist him to
his own and the public right. If that
right is invaded, as by the defendants
demurrer it is admitted to be in this
case. he may invoke the aid Of this
tribunal to enable him to perform his
sworn duties to the public. Any
member of that Legislative body may
interpose to preserve the lawful rec
ords Of its proceedings, and prevent
the dearest rights of the community
the very foundations OF its laws, the
evidence upon which the Interests OF
thousands depend, FROM BEING IN A
WHOLESALE MANNER FALsIFIED AMI
DEBAUCHED. 1t was shown on the
argument that in a matter vital to the
public any citizen may institute pro
ceedings by mandamus.
cit is also contended that there i.
a misjoinder of defendants. No
there Is no misjoinder, if the facts ar.
as stated in the complaint ; AND TIL
DEMURRER ADMITS THEM. Wha
papers the Secretary has are admitted
to be unsigned, MUTILATED, AM
FRAUDULENT papers, aud are no
"archives Of the Legislature" (which
alone the Secretary has right to re
ceive), any more than would be tn
records of baseball club, or an,
other uneglslat,ve association or gath
ering. OF this he was, and is, full
. apprised. If what is admitted to b
true are real facts, the Secretary i
aiding and abetting the Clerk in hi
J attempt to foist upon the Territory, a
, records, WHAT ARE NOT RECORDS; t
be used, if at all, as conclusive ev
, dence to establish as facts what ar
) not facts, and that legislative &C,
were done which it is admitted wer
! never done by a Legislature. TIL
l joining by these two officers in tn
preparation Of a grave wrong, on
t doing one part and the other con
/. p!eting it, makes them both particep
t and subject to the same process,
;, necessary, for its correction and pr,
E vention. In this case it is necessar
), The Secretary MUST PRODUCE TIL
/ FRAUDULENT PAPERS; ABSTAIN FRO
e TREATING THEM AS GENUINE; or,
S he threatens to do, from recordln
e them and sending them to Congre
f and the several officers of the Unite
n States government, as genuine, or
y any way to act upon them, until Il
e clerk shall write them truthfully, al
:, they shall have the necessary offici
j. sanction OF the chief officer of Il
n House whose proceedings they profe
IS to record, and until they thereby b
n come real records and archives Of Il
II Legislature. There is no misjoindt
y "Proceeding in the order of t
y attorney for the Secretary, we m
e here inquire whether the session