The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1890-12-04
OF This District Court, in the Full
Sense OF the
Term.
He Issued an Injunction Which
Stopped the Tracklayin9
Last Summer.
Tho Supreme Court Makes Another De-
cision in tho Langford Case-Judge
Dewitt Dissents.

last uno the street railway tracklaylDR on
Main street was stopped by an injunction
obtained in the district court. Frank
Langford was also cited to appear before
the court for contempt in disobeying the
injunction. He was fined $500. From this
he appealed to the supreme court, which
set aside the contempt proceedings. Judge
Galbraith, who lives at Dillon, and who is
the judge OF the Fifth judicial district, sat
,, on the bench of the district court here for
Judge Hunt at the time and issued the in
junction. The supreme court, in an opin-
ion yesterday, holds that Judge Galbraith
had not the authority to issue the injunc-
ton, and hence the contempt proceedings
were null. From this decision Justice De-
haustive review of the authorities. He
says that his associates arc of the opinion
that Judge Galbraith was not Judge Of
the First judicial district in the
full sense Of the term, but
to simply presiding over an open session in
court. He believes that a broader view
must obtain. The action in which the in
junction was granted was commenced in
the district court of Lewis and Clarke
county last June. Judge Galbraith. who is
uuO Juuk0 1OE tuc AlCn JuO1CldA ulbtElCUs
held court for Judge Hunt during the court
house hours of that day, which WAS Satur-
day. All that appears in reference to Judge
Hunt on that day is that he was present in
Helena where the court was held. He did
not hold any court that day or exercise any
judicial functions. Judge Galbraith con-
tinued to hold court on the Monday follow
ing, June %. Between the adjournment of
Saturday and the converting on Monday he
was not. of course, on the bench, or doing
the work which ID done in court. During
this period, and on Saturday afternoon, at
complained of. During the whole of this
pei iod, Saturday. Sunday and Monday, he
was doing all that is understood as ''hold-
ing court" He left the bench for night
and a non-iudicial day. But on those days
be was .'holding court" in the full sense
of the term. What was the chRrac-
ter, asks the dissenting opinion, official
or otherwise OF the individual Thomas j.
Galbraith when he was "holding court as
described? Was he referee, was he a
trier of q single cause by stipulation or
otherwise? We're his functions limited by
an order assigning him to this court, or was
he Judge of the court?
Justice Dewitt says in his opinion: II
cannot but conclude that Judge Galbraith
holding court as he was, when he iss1ed
the order, was judge of the court, whether
I regard the common understanding of
language OF INC nlbtOIy Oh loyal ptOCeeo-
ings.
1T occurs to me that the present disagree
ment between my associates and myself in
this case is the old difference in the doc
trines of construction that has employed
the thought of constitutional writer's from
the foundation of the American govern
ment, the history Of which is luminously
written through the reports of the supreme
court of the United States. 1t is rule of
construction of the constitution of the
United States evolved through the broad
views and comprehensive genius of Ameri-
cas- greatest American. Chief Justice Mar
shall, that if the court will closely scruti-
nize the gran. of power to ascertain
whether it exists. then, when it is deter
mined that the power Is granted the court mr.
means of carrying the power into effect"
The court adjourned yesterday for the
term. In the case of Patrick Sweeny va.
Consolidated Ten Mile Mining company.
the motion to dismiss the appeal was sus-
tanned.