The Anaconda standard. [volume] (Anaconda, Mont.) 1889-1970, 1898-04-19
ANACO NDA NE VS..
Hs QUITE A SURPRISE
ono Of the Supreme Court Dscis-
3o0s Handed Down Yesterday.
IT RELATES TO RAvALLI
Ddt Probably Is wni Turn Out OF once
Tie Members OF 10 Deer Lodge
County Board Who Took
Seats Last November.

One Of the decisions rendered yester-
day by the supreme court of this state
boards Of commissioner in several coun-
tSes. 1t probably affects Deer Lodge
county directly. In this county. COM
rnissioners were elected in 1894 to take
b places of men who, through resig-
nation or otherwise. had retired from
service and in whose stead appointed
commissioner were then serving.
Amer this election two opinions pre-
vailed. The first was that the men who
were elected in 1894, to MI vacancies.
would retire In November. 1s97-that be-
lag the time when the terms would
have expired for those who had re-
signed or had otherwise retired. Thu
other opinion was that the commission
ers elected in 1894 were elected. not to
complete the terms Of resigned COM
missioners. but that they were chosen
for full terms. SO that they would hold
once until November. 1895, the term for
county commissioners In Montana be-
ing tour. years.
At the general election held in 1896.
Deer Lodge county voted for the choice
OF county commissioners, TO take their
seats in November Of 1897. Thus 1t will
be seen that In this county the theory
was that h men elected in 1894 were
chosen to MI unexpired terms.
The three successful candidates in the
election of 1896 were A. NJ. Walker,
John d. Rom and James w. Geary. A
year later. in November of last year.
these men took seats as the commission
ers for Deer Lodge county. Mr.. Walker
had served with the old board. In be-
half of Mr.. Williams and Mr.. Hoffman
quo w%arranto proceedings were brought
before Judge Brantly. and the hearing
resulted in a decision hat sustained
the new board.
The district court in Deer Lodge coun-
ty figured it out in this way: The first
county commissioners under statehood.
were elected in 1889 n they entered at
once upon four-year terms which ex-
pired In 1898. In that year, commission
er elected in 1892 began their terms. to
serve four years, OF until November.
1897. The view of the court was that
the election Of 1894 was illegal. that the
persons appointed TO MI the places of
those whose terms began In 1898 but
who had retired. should have served
out the balance OF the term. until No
vember, 1897. under appointment. and
hat there ought not to have been an
election in 1894. The supreme court
nOfuE tnat n COUNTY COMMISSIONER Is
elected for four years and that the COM
missioners elected in 1894 hold till Mo-
vember. 1898.
A case similar to the one in Deer
Lodge county presented itself in Ravalli
county. In that case. In proceedings be-
fore Judge Woody. a decision was
reached which was the same as in Deer
Lodge county. In the Ravalli county
case, an appeal to the supreme court
HvoQ foEon Yesterday that rptyrt ran.
dered a decision which reverses the dis
trict court. The result will be. in Ra-
valli county. that the commissioners
who took office last November must re-
tire and that the old board will resume
it's management of county business. Pre-
sumably that will also be the result In
Deer Lodge county. although it will be
necessary to await the full text of the
decision rendered yesterday before 1t is
known that the cases for the two coun-
ties are parallel. They are believed,
however. to present like situations. Fol-
lowing IL the summary of the decision
rendered In the supreme court yester-
day in the Ravalli county case:
The supreme court to-day decided
hat John w. Mayhem, John +. Fred
ericks and Fred Weir. who were elect
ed county commissioners of Ravalli
county in November. 1894, are entitled
to hold Office until Nov. s of this year,
thus ending a contest that has attract-
ed attention all over Montana. This
reverses Judge Woody, who held that
John T. Williams. Samuel Lucas and
j. d. Watts, who were elected in No.
vember. 1896. were the duty elected
county commissioners. When Ravalli
county was created in 1893 the act Gre
ating the county filled all the offices.
The commissioners named by the legis-
lature served until Jan. z, 1895. A. the
general election in November. 1894.
Mayhem, Fredericks and Weir were
elected to succeed the first commission
ers. They qualified in January, 1895,
and were serving when the present con-
test was instituted by Williams. Lucas
and Watts. The old board claimed they
were entitled to hold until November.
1884. Quo warranto proceedings We're
instituted by the new board. and in
passing up the matter Judge Woody
held In effect that all county commits
sioners in the state. in old inc new
counties alike. must be elected in the
same year; that the first set of COM
missioners held until Nov. s. 1898; the
second until Nov. s. 1897; that the first
and second commissioners were really
serving out al unexpired term. counting
from the admission Of the state as the
starting point. and that the plaintiffs.
having been elected at the regular
chosen all over the state generally,
were the legally elected commissioners
The defendants appealed.
Chief Justice Pemberton. who pre-
pared the opinion. gives the material
question to be decided upon the appeal,