Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1897-11-17
WHEEL1NG W VA. WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER II 1897

that court Vi equity CduuOl cuJoiA
an officer or party from exercising the
power of removal"
This is dealt with most extensively,
and the conclusions noted are:
The Plaintiffs in these actions are all
officers de facto if not de jure, claiming
the possession of their Offices and per-
forming the duties under color of ap-
pointment. | therefore reach the con-
clusion that the plaintiffs have right
and interest involved in the offices they
hold and that that right and interest is
questioned by defendants in these cases.
and that the only legal remedy they
have to protect themselves in the en-
joyment Of their various offices as
against those who are seeking to GUST
them, is the restraining power of this
court to prevent interferelces with their
possession until the titles'to the offices
have been settled by due course of law.
1t follows from what have said,
'First-sThat the act known as the
Civil Service Act is constitutional.
'Second-That Congress has not dele
gated to the President and the commits
sion legislative powers.
'Third-That by rule 8, section 1, the
internal revenue service has been p,ac-
ed under the civil service act and rules
made in pursuance Of ii.
''FouIth-That the plaintiffs in these
actions are officers of the government in
the internal revenue service.
"Fifth-That they cannot be removed
from their positions except for causes
other than political, in which event their
removal must be made under the terms
and provisions Of the civil service act
and the rules promulgated under 1t,
which, under the act of Congress, be-
came part of the law.
"SiXth-That the attempt to change
the position and rank of the ofhcers III
these cases is in violation of law.
"Seventh-That court OF equity has
jurisdiction to restrain the appointing
power from removing the officers from
their positions if such removals are IN
violation of the civil service act.
For the reasons assigned the demur-
rers to the bills will be overruled.'
The Court next considers the defense
raised by the owners, other than the
questions of law disposed of by the de-
murrers, and this is dwell upon at great
length. Summing up, the Court says:
Il reach the conclusion that the pre-
ponderance of evidence is with the
plaintiffs. and that neither the gauger
nor storekeepers have ever vacated or
surrendered their offices or positions;
that in contemplation of law they are
in the legal custody of their offices and
can only be displaced by proceedings
Instituted under the executive order OF
July 9th. 1897; that the offices not
having ban.. surrendered, and the in
;..ncllGn being served while plaintiffs
were in possession, it was effective to
prevent the interference of the defend
ants with the plaintiffs in the posses
SIGN of their offices.
Il deem it unnecessary to discuss the
competency of the plaintiffs for their
positions, though the evidence tends
strongly to show that they were fully
competent, having served in those posi-
items since 1898.
lone other position of the plaintiffs
remains to be noticed, and that is, that
under the legislative an = judicial act of
1885, re-enacted in 1886, the collector
is prohibited from recommending to
the Secretary CT the Treasury, for APP
pointment, more officers of this class
than fifteen per cent. in excess of the
number engaged in performing the
dnties at the time. 1t is very clear
from the affidavit Of Ruckman that the
act has been violated, but it is not nee
essary to rest the case upon this posi-
tiCn.
Il think that both the law and the
facts are with the plaintiffs and the in
junction heretofore awarded must be
made perpetual"