Jamestown weekly alert. [volume] (Jamestown, Stutsman County, D.T. [N.D.]) 1882-1925, 1896-02-13
POSSESSION GIVEN.
DIR. Archibald Volunteers to
Turn Over Possession of
Hospital Today.
Something About the Argument
of the Case and AttOr-
neys' Work.
From Mondays Daily

Glaspell at noon today, by DR.. Archi-
bald, that he would turn over the keys
md possession of the hospital today, to
DR.. Moore, without further delay. This
was done in order to save unnecessary
expense and the serving of writ. and
ID pursuance of the decision of the
court rendered Saturday after
noon. Accordingly the new superln-
tendent and Mr. Camp went to the
hospital this afternoon and were given
the keys of the institution, the care of
the property and the patients being
to Supt. Moore. This was
on the part of DR.. Archibald
and it enabled the new management to
enter into possession, several days earlier
than otherwise as the writ for Judge
CorIiss' signature was sent to Grand
Forks today, and could not be served
before Wednesday or Thursday next.
The case was ably argued for
the trustees by Attorneys
Camp and Glaspell. They were backed
up by authorities that covered every law
point,end their victory in the court Is
naturally gratifying to professional
pride. 1t has become perhaps as noted
a case as any ever tried IN the state
Judge Newman of Fargo and Attorney
Bald WIN also made strong presentation
of tho law points involved in their con-
tention that the court had no jourisdic-
ton. The attorneys for the trustees re-
lied on the broad principles that the
majority must rule and the right of re-
moval is equal with that Of appoint
ment. The opinions of the court will
be read with interest by all attorney
and the public generally. The reputa-
ton of the North Dakota supreme court
for sound legal knowledge is becoming
highly considered in legal circles
throughout the country.
The following is An abstract of the su-
preme courts decision in the Archibald
mandamus case:
State etc. Ex-rel etc. vs.. Archibald.
Syllabus by Court.
This court has original jurisdiction in
which the writ named in the constitution
may be employed to initiate such juris-
diction. Bat that jurisdiction is limi-
ted to cases involving the sovereignty
of the state, it's privileges or franchises,
or the liberty of the cltlzen, this court
Judging for itself, in each case, whether
that particular case is within its juris-
diction.
The State Hospital for the Insane is
by law under the management and con-
troll of board OF i've trustees, which
has power to appoint the superintendent
of such hospital and remove him at
pleasure.
The defendant having been removed
BY the board from the office of superin-
tendent, and the relAtor having been
oppointed by the board to fill such office
IN his place.
Held, that IN mandamus proceedings
to compel the defendant to turn over to
The relator such office, the sovereignty
OF the state was involved in direct and
important sense, the right OF the board
of trustees to control and manage a
great institution, being necessarily in
volved; and that therefore this court
had original jurisdiction of such pro-
ceedings. Mandamus is the proper
remedy to compel one who has no color
of title to an office to surrender it to one
who has the prima facie title to it.
The grant OF power to appoint to pub
lie office where no term OF office is fixed
by law, carries with it as an incident
the absolute power Of removal at any
time without notice or charges or hear
ing, and without the cause of removal
being inquired into by any court. Such
power vested in board cannot be lin
tied by any action taken by such board,
whether by appointing the officer for a
fixed term or bylaws restricting the
power Of removal to cases where cause
TO, removal exists. A motion to re-
move the defendant having been made
and seconded at a meeting OF the board
at which all the members were present,
the chairman refused to put the motion
on the ground that it was illegal. There
upon it was put by the trustee who
made the motion and received the vote
of three OF the five members, the other
two trustees refusing to vote. Held,
that these proceedings we're etfectual to
remove the defendant. Also held, that
the relator was legally appointed to the
office. the same proceedings being had
o. tte motion that be be appointed.
Also held, that the approval OF the re-
lator's bond by the board was estab-
lished by showing that the same pro-
ceedipos were had on the motion to ap-
prove it.
The fact that the superintendent may
be removed from Office for the causes
mentioned IN S197 OF the constitution
(sssumlng this to be The CASEY. does not
impair the power of the board to remove
him at pleasure.
1t Is understood that Trustee Corn
wall had not sent in his resignation up
to Saturday, and it is reported that he
may not do so, seeing that the other