Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1897-09-23
0XY-HYDRQGEN CASE.


Argument Before Chancellor on Rule to
show Cause why 1t should Not he Re-
instateh on Keguinr Docket.
Chancellor Nicholaon heard argu.
ment Saturday on the rule on Chancellor
al Litem Henry II. johnson and the
Mayor and Council Of Wilmington to
show cause why the Oxy. Hydrogen Gas
Go. caee should nat no reinstatad Oh
the regular docket Of ths court OF chan
Gerry to be heard by the Chameleon.
Tho suit is that OF the Mayor and
Council va. j. Edward Addicks, ct al,
and 1t came into chapeery about six
years ago under injunction proceedings
to prevent the gas company from tear
ing up the city streets. a preliminary
injunction was SECURED by the city. A
year or go later argument was made be-
fore Henry II. Johnaon, who had been
named as Uhancellor nd Item because
the then Chancellor WolGoit had been
an attorney for MIR. Adtlicks. No dsci
sion has ever been rendered, and the
present question before the Chancellor
TO return the case 10 the regular docket
was brought up on the application of
the original defundants. Austin liar
riugton and II. II. Ward of this city
and g. Borklsy Taylor of Philadelphia
appeared Saturday for the defendants,J.
Edward Addicks, ct al, and Lewis 9.
VauHegrift aud Arthur w. Epruance
appeared for the city.
Mr.. Harrington opened for the rule
and was followed bY Mr.. 3nylur. Mr..
Spruaure opened for the city and was
followed hy Mr.. Vnndegrift. MIR. Ward
made The closing argument In behalf of
the rule
The contention of the defendants
counsel was that until the new Con.
stitntiun the Office of Chancellor nd
litem was abolished when all the offices
of the judges were vacated and the
courts aboliHhed that Johnson was n
judge undor bis appointment and held
office under the terms of the Con6titn.
ton of 1881, and heiug n Judge his term
expired with tn others; and the inris-
diGtion of the proceedings of all cases
in the old court were transferred and
restored TO the new court of chancery,
which placed this case under the iuris-
diction of the present Chancellor. 1t
was further contended that the ConHti-
tuition provides specifically that where
by reason of interest or other reason the
Chancellor was not qualified, the Chief
Justice should act as Chancellor.
They held that there is no Chancellor
al Item since the abolition of Chan
callor and judges and that the cause
should be feinstated and heard to its
determination.
Messrs Spruance aud Vandegrift
stated to the courr that the question
was Of such novel character and SO void
of precedent that they had no data on
which to base an aggressive position.
They thought, however, that fair
consideration Of the question required
them to present the possible arguments
il favor of the view that the Chancel.
lor ad litem was retained. Thus the
new Constitution provided for tine
retention of all officers not specifically
disposed and while the reuglar Chan
cellor and judges of the old courts wore
thus retired. there was no reason for
surprising that the Ghancslpr al Item
did not remain in office alung with the
register and the other officers OF the
court of chanGery.
The Chancellor reserved his decision
and adjourned the court until the
second Monday in October