Albuquerque daily citizen. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1895-1903, 1898-12-23
RIeHr 10 sus IN FpRnA PAurnRIs.
Supr,m: Court c early Dsfiasd Standing
OF Poor LltiRants IN Courts.

Of Poor Lltiganis IN Courts.
In the SESSION Of the territorial su.
prems court held Saturday. December
II. the following opinion, which Yves
%elneurred In by Chief Justice Mills and
Aisoolat3 Justice Parker. was handed
diwn by Associate Justice C~fumpacker,
Justices McFie and Leland not sitting In
ths case.
Gaze No. 40. d. r. 3 arup, plaintiff In
error, vs. John 4 Cohey, defendant in
error, error from the district court Of
5 jcorro county. This was an action In
81 seiment brought for the recovery Of
certain mining grounds described in the
d iclaration.
The plaintiff In error was duly ruled
OF the 2s.h day Of January, 1897, which
was during a regular term Of the dis.
ttict court Of the 9th Judicial district
OF the territory OF New Mexico, within
ald for the county OF socorro. 10 give
bond for costs in the sum OF $500 In said
cause within sixty days from and after
the date OF said order. The order was
Later extended 10 the 6rst day Of April,
1891. and on March 20 there was dled in
the vdics Of the clerk OF said court, by
the plaintiffs IN error, an affidavit TO
poverty In conformity with the statute;
later, said court entered judgment
abating SAID cause Tor failure to give
bond for costs. GA October 8. 1897,
plaintiffs in error aled = motion to set
aside the Judgment OF abatement, which
N zion was oyerruled and tbs case was
taken TO the suprems court on a writ Of
error.
Zach OF the alleged errors complained
Of grows cut OF the courts ruling in sus.
tanning the motion OF defendant In error
70 abats the cause for failure Of plaintiffs
q error to give security for costs, aud the
adjudication OF abatement OF the cause.
Where, ~ In this case, the record shows
the making by plaintiffs 10 error, within
the time by which they we're ruled TO give
security for costs, or a sufficient oath
that they we're too poor 10 pay costs. the
material question Is whether or not such
oath IN an answ,r TO the rule. II ia solya
BILE by the construction OF the statutes
involved, which read as follows:
Complied Laws Of 1897, section 2sO9:
"In all cases the plaintiff, on motion OF
any person interested in the suit or costs,
may be ruled 10 give security for costs,
and In case he shall fail 10 do 80, on or
before the drst day OF next term after
such rule, the cause shall abate."
Section 2SH3i III any person wishing
TO institute suit, or having done 80, shall
make oath that he Is too poor 20 pay costs,
he shall have any and all process Of the
court free Of charge"
1hsse laws, sequent sections OF one
enactment, tested by the accepted prin-
clples Of construction reflect light upon
each other and are readily harmonized.
They eyinee the legislative intent clear
ly TO be that the courts OF justice shall be
open to every person. rich or poor,
who has suffered a legal injury TO his
lanes. goods, person or reputation. In
Iced, any other construction would rem
der migratory a beneacent law. Given
taeD, the oath required by section 1892.
the statute Is mandatory, aud by vir-
tue thereof. plaintiffs in error were 80.
cure In their right TO sue In forma pau
peris as we'll after as before the lnstitu-
tion OF their suit; and such oath. stand
ing In the stead Of a cost bond, was suf-
acient answer In the case to the rule
for security In this case for costs.
The assignment OF errors we 1nd we'll
predicated, and the cause IL reversed
with direction 10 the court below TO set
aside lis judgment Of abatement. aud to
proceed In accordance with the views
here expressed.
The syllabus In the case prepared by
the court reads.
where q plaintiff makes oath 70.
quiTed by section 1893 OF the Compiled
Laws Of New Mexico, 1897, after suit is
Instituted and prior 10 the time In
which he ia ruled 10 give security for
costs, IL Is error for the court 10 abate
the cause for failure 10 give such no.
curity; the oath standing In the stead
OF the cost bond being sufficient answer
70 the rule"