The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1893-09-14

'Its proceedings are not judicial pro-
ceedings, in the ordinary sense of
those terms, although it is a court,
embraced within the judicial depart
ment OF the government of the state"
We must presume that the amend
ment to the judiciary article, adopted
in 1891, comforting the supervisory
jurisdi. tion on district courts over
county commissioners courts, without
changing OF authorizing the legisla-
ture to change the Jurisdiction of the
county commissioners court, was
adopted with full understanding of
| these decisions, and that, the refore,
| the supervisory jurisdiction conferred
on district courts was power to
supervise the action of the commits
sioners courts in the exercise of
county business" of public, legisla-
tive and political nature, including it's
authority to order elections and de-
termine the result thereof. The only
remedy through which this super
visory power can be exercised without
legislation is by employing the writ
OF prohibition; and this supervisory
power does not, therefore, extend to
correcting errors of judgment COM
mitted by said court when acting
within the scope of its powers. Hence,
the suI ervisOry jurisdiction of the
district court will seldom be brought
into action, for the great volume of
questions that will be passed on by
that court will be within its jurisdic-
tod and not subject to be affected by
the supervisory control of district
courts
If, as have held, there is no power
vested in the commissioners court to
order or declare or publish the result
of a county election under the local
option law when the law is already In
force in part of the county, bat that in
such cases the power of said court Is
limited to ordering elections in the
localities 10 be affected by the election,
then the County commissioners court
of Williamson county acted beyond
its jurisdiction in ordering the election
in question, and the election will be
void when held, and said court will
have no power to declare the local
option law to have been adopted or re-
jected, although said court has certain
specified jurisdiction over the subject
OF ordering such elections and decIar-
ing the result thereof, AS said by
Mr.. High: "The province of the writ
} is not necessarily confined to cases
} where the subordinate court is abso-
lutely devoid of jurisdiction, but is
also extended to cases where such
tribunal, although rightfully enter
} tanning jurisdiction of the subject
matter in controversy, has exceeded
: its legitimate powers. "-High on
Extraordinary Legal Remedies, Sec.
731. The same author says, in an
J other section of his work: at follows
from the ex raordinary nature of the
remedy as already considered, that
the exercise of the Jurisdiction is linn
J tied to cases where it is necessary TO
give general superintendent and
, control over inferior tribunals. and is
l.. never allowed except in cases of a
> usurpation or abuse OF power, and not
then unless other existing remedies
, are inadequate to afford relief.n-Sec.
} 767. We must, therefore, consider
whether there are other adequate
: remedies for the wrongs complained
} OF in this case. The original jurisdic-
ton of contested elections conferred
, on district courts by the constitution
as amended, while evincing purpose
, to clothe the district court
, with jurisdiction over such
political SUBJECTS, is imperative
, without Legislation, except as
to cases in which there are persons
. contending with each other over an
I election to an office. For, while the
local option law attempts TO confer
3 right to contest in such cases and pro-
vides for plaintiff in such contests, it
l makes no provision as to who shall be
3 made party or parties defendant in
} such cases. Ana as those provisions
Iof 4 ha Stof t1to of in of-
= erence to contesting elections held to
r determine any question other than the
] election of officers, were held uncon-
/ stitutional IN all their parts before. the
4, adoption of the amendment to the ju-
= dietary article now in force lex Parte
= Towles, 48 Tex, ABB they do not af-
f., ford method of procedure. If the
l local option law, in providing for a
: contest "in such manner as has been
or may hereafter be prescribed by
= law" had reference to the statutes in
r. question, such unconstitutional pro-
I visions having the forms of law, but
= which were not laws, could not by
l such reference be enacted into law
3 without violating the spirit of the pro-
9 vision OF the constitution of this state,
L thai "Do law shall be revived or
E amended by reference TO its title; but
!, in such case the act revived or the Sec
= ton or sections amended shall be re-
} enacted and published at length"
T Const., art. 8, sec. SO. The appellate
= jurisdiction conferred on district courts
over county commissioners courts by
9 the constitution is also imperative
: without legislation as 10 the action of
, the latter court as to questions arising
! out of their ordering elections and de-
: cIaring the result thereof over ques-
Q tions other than the election of Off
Q GERS, for the reason that no procedure
a has been provided by which any per-
Y son can become a party to any, pro-
3 ceeding in such court SO as to take an
: appeal from any action of the G urt.
i But it is insisted that the plaintiffs
, will have remedy after the result OF
y the election is decided and published,
}: in that they can resist the enforcement
!, OF the law if it shall not have
g teen legally adopted. The only re-
l. medy Whic could be then used by