The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1898-10-15

of counsel the people might. at any general
election choose judges of the court of con-
Citation or Of any other court which the
Legislature might establish because of the
knowledge that the people would have at
the time of the election that the Legisla-
ture might at its ensuing session create
such court. The people choose officers for
definite terms. to begin and end at a known
time, as fixed by the law in force at the
date of the election.
NOT ELECTED FOR FOUR YEARS.
The turning point in the case seems to be
upon the question were the incumbents of
the office of appellate judge elected In 1896
for a term of four years? Since it must be
conceded that the prescribed duration of
the office was but two months from the ex-
piration of the term of their predecessors
but one answer would seem possible, viz,
that they could be lected for no longer pc
Rod than the expressed duration of the
office. Just how the people could be deemed
to have elected for four years
to an office which they had
said through their Legislature should
comprehension. The conclusion that they
did SO intend must rest upon the assump-
ton that they anticipated that the life of
the court would be extended long enough
to fill out the four years. The assumption
from the fact that the act has been passed
1t is sufficiently difficult to know what laws
have been passed, and the people cannot be
: The case was a very plain one when
the people assembled at the polls at the gen.
eral election in 1885, There was an Appellate
Court in existence whose life. was limited
by the law upon the statute books to the
first day of March, 1897. There could then be
no such thing as electing anyone to fill the
In order that there be a judge there must
ba a court. The people with this knowl-
edge. therefore, could elect no judge OF the
Appellate Court for any time beyond the
life of the court. Consequently, if the judges
then elected had any authority to sit as such
offlcers after March l. 1897, such authority
could not come from the electors. but must
come from appointment by the Governor
10 I'LL vacancy or by holding over under
the Constitution until their successors could
be elected and qualified. Any act of the
Legislature we have already seen could give
them no official life. The contention of APP
pellees that because the Legislature, by
amendment of the statute, might have ex-
tended the life of the court to four years
at any time before the election and the
judges would, therefore, have been elected
for full term of four years. it follows that
the same results must take place when tho
Legislature amends the statute in like man
ner after the election for the reason. as
counsel say, that an amendme mt to a stat
ute becomes part thereof as If it had been
enacted as part OF the original statute,
is utterly fallacious so far as it affects OPP
erations under the statute before such
amendment. This principal was recognized
by this court as now constituted in Walsh
VS.. State, 142 Ind, 357, where an amend
ment to a fee and salary law, though held
10 be part or the law as III originally tn
acted with it. was yet construed to operate
only as to matters occurring after the
amendment.
We are therefore, of opinion that the Pc
riod of time for which the present judges
of the Appellate Court were elected came
to an end on March l. 1897 and that whether
they can only hold until the election and
qualification of their successors; and, there
fore that the State Board of Election Com
missioners should have placed the names of
the REALTORS upon the official ballot as cam
didates for said offices.
The judgment is reversed, with inStruc-
tions to overrule the demurrer TO the COM
plant and alternative writ, and for further
proceedings not inconsistent with this opin-
ion. The clerk of this court is directed to
certify this opinion and decision to the lower
court at once.