The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1897-12-28
Especial to The Messenger.)

Especial to The Messcnger.)
Raleigh, N. c., December 23.-The
supreme court, Justice Douglass deIiv-
ering the opinion, filed a decision this
afternoon in the case of Caldwell
against Wilson, involving title to the
railway commissioner Craftsmanship.
The decision is just as expe- Tr~@"e
is no doubt that the governor anu
Caldwell Knew two days ago what the
result would be. The opinion is of i'm
mense length. The principal feature
of it refers to the refusal Of Judge lob
insOn to submit any issues to a jury.
The court says this refusal was proper,
as there were no disputed facts before
the court. The opinion adds:
1T is not denied that the governor
notified the defendant to appear and
answer; that he did SO appear and
nswer that the governor subsequent
Iy suspended him, giving him written
notice of such action and appointed
Caldwell; that the latter duly qualified,
demanded possession of the office, was
refused by Wilson and brought suit.
There was absolutely nothing to go to
a jury unless the court went behind
the action of the governor, which we
think could not he reviewed by the
court. Suspension by the governor is
not a final determination Of the de-
PENDANTS rights, which must be ulti-
mately passed on by the legislature.
oittirr ,rpor,YC ~ Il, +l-
court OF Impeachment. If it should
determine that the defendant had been
suspended without just cause he would
he at once reinstated and be entitled
to hts full pay from the time Of his
suspension. The duty of suspension
was imposed upon the governor from
the highest motive Of public policy, to
prevent danger to the public interests,
which might arise from leaving such
powers and responsibilities in the
hands of men legally disqualified. AS
the governor was, therefore, by the
letter and spirit of the law, required
to act and act promptly, necessarily
upon his own findings of facts, we are
compelled to hold that such official ac-
ton was, under the circumstances, due
process Of law. Even if it were prope
the governor would have no power to
direct an issue like a chancellor. AS
to trials by jury, it has been held from
Temotest times that this right did not
apply to equitable proceedings and tina
in the determination of many matters
of fact tho in tprNrapt ion of "a ;,,x- r,-o.
neither necessary nor possible, as, for
example, applications for receivers, in
functions and proceedings in contempt,
and even in actions at law there are
many matters of fact which must be
found 'by the court below and are not
even renewable in this court. Every
time a judge below takes a case from
the jury and directs a verdict he prac-
tically deprives the party of trial by
jury, and yet that he can so direct a
verdict against a party on whom rests
the Onus has been held by a long Line
of decisions by this court from Witt
kowsky against WassOn,, list N. c.. re-
ports, to Spruill against the Inman
Company, 120th N. G.. reports. Offices
are only the subjects of property 50
Far rs they can be so in safety to the
general interest involved in discharge
of their duties. Chief Justice Ruffin
SO held in the case Of HOke against
Henderson. Tt is doubtful if he ever
contemplated the extent to which the
matter of claim of title to. public office
would be carried, and least Of all that
SO extreme construction would be in
voked to bring the tenure of high Of
fetal positions within the operation of
the amendment to the federal consti-
tuition primarily adopted for the pro
lection OF the colOred race.
THE statute under consideration
does not interfere with any vested
right, nor does our decision conflict
with that in Hoke against Henderson.
The power Of the governor to suspend
and the reserved right Of the legisla-
ture to remov We're assented to by the
defendant when he accepted office. The
railway commission is merely an ad-
ministrative board created by the state
for carrying into effect the will OF the
state as expressed 10y it's legislature.
The power of suspension rests in the
governors hands, and when exercised
in an orderly manner, is not review
able by the courts. Whether the action
of the governor was justified by the
facts. which he alone could find, is not
for us to say. The defendant waived
his right to trial by jury by his &C
ceptance of the commission on the face
OF which the fateful words of the Gre
alive act were written.
THE Judgment must, therefore, be
affirmed, but in view of the public in
terests involved we deem it proper not
to remand the case, but to enter final
Judgment in this court. This action is
taken on motion Of counsel made with
~-l A.