The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1898-01-11

tracing the attention of people every
where in the mining region, and must
have an answer in congressional legis-
lation. The law of apex and extra lat
eral right is casting its mighty shadow
over the enterprises of the present and
future. No legislation can, OF course.
relieve against past or present condi-
tons, but a change in the federal law,
restricting its grantee to the depths
as we'll as the surface within the planes
( of his surface boundaries, viii, in its
( application to cases of the future, make
titles simple and clear. which otherwise
may be confused and clOuded. l have
not the time to present the argument,
nor is it necessary, but 1 invite your
! earnest and careful attention to the
! subject.
THE SCHOOL LAW.
BY the school law of 1897 the control
4 of the examination of teachers is prac-
( tically turned over to the county SUI
/ perintendent. He appoints two persons
resident of the county as associate ex-
aminerS. He has power to remove both
or either of them for misconduct or in
capacity (of which he is the sole judge,
and to fill vacancies thus made. He di-
reefs the times of holding sessions for
the examination of teachers, and the
| test of applicants knowledge, under
standing and aptness to teach and gov
ern, is based nor only upon percent
age OF correct answers required by the
rules, but .'other evidence disclosed by
the examination, including particu-
larly the superintendent knowledge
and information of the candidates ex-
perience and ability as a teacher
1t was quite unnecessary to resort to
so much circumlocution to accomplish
the desired end. The intent to place the
sole power of selecting and employing
teachers in the hands of the county SUI
perintendent shines through the petty
DISCUSSES of the act as clearly as if
specially declared. The law should
forthwith be amended so as to strip
the superintendent of these large
powers.
Some changes are made in the law of
succession. The most important appear
to be those relative to the interest of
the wife in the husbands real property
and the right of Legitimate children
LEGITIIATING POLYGAALOUS
CHILDREN.
Mr.. Varian then referred to the act
approved April 3, 1885, legitimating
vides that the issue of bigamous and
poiygamOus marriages heretofore con-
tracted between members of the Church
of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints,
born on or prior to the 4th day of jan
uary, 1896, are hereby legitimated and
such issue are entitled to inherit from
both parents and to have and enjoy all
rights and privileges to the same ex-
tent and in the same manner as
though born in lawful wedlock. This
act cannot be operative in any case
where the descent was cast prior to
date of enactment, and as to future
cases even, its constitutionality, it
would seem, may be questioned under
the prohibition against special laws
changing the law of descent and sue
ces sion. The chic n : bigamous and
polygamous marriages contracted be-
tween members of one church or sect
are declared capable of inheriting,
While the issue of unlawful marriages
contracted between persons not mem
berS of the particular church are eX-
cluded. If the act shall be found to
be invalid, then the law upon this
question seems to be in this condition.
The children of bigamous or polyga-
nous marriages, known as Mormon
marriages, born prior to JAM, l, 1888,
and all illegitimate children born be-
tween Feb. 10. 1887, and Feb. 20, 1888,
are legitimated. All children of biga-
nous or polygamous marriages born
after Jan. l, 1888, and before Feb. 49,
1887, and all children born out of lawful
wedlock after Feb. 20. 1888, and before
March 9, 1896, when the first state law
was passed, are Legitimate. All chill
dren born out of lawful wedlock but
not of bigamous or polygamous mar
riages between March 8, 1896, and Jan.
1, 1898, are nlegitimate.
SUNDRY PROVISIONS.
The ruling of the United States su-
preme court declaring invalid verdicts
by nine jurors, under the territorial
form of government, was referred to,
as was also the expensive and very
fneonvenient provision of the cOnstitu-
ton providing that all civil and GRIM
inaI business arising in any county,
must be tried in such county, unless a
change of venue be taken in such cases
as may be provided by law"
A constitutional amendment changing
the present law which limits the right
of appeal to the supreme court to final
judgments only, was mentioned, with
others, and the desirability of a change
from certain interlocutory orders of
the district court.
GOVERNMENT BY INJUNCTION.
In the federal courts some notable judg-
ments nave been delivered, which would
be OF interest to consider. Especially is
THIS true OF the opinions of the supreme
court in eXpOunding and, | may saw at
commerce law. l must be content how
ever. with a few observations upon the
evolution of the law of injunction The
marvellous growth of the judicial power in
this particular, during the past few years,
has been and IS the cause of much anX-
lol-S discussion L refer 10 d few of the
cases growing out of the labor troubles
as best illustrative OF my subject. In the
case of In Re Dooiittle, % Fed. $40, de-
cided March, 1855, an interference by
strikers with property in the hands of
receivers. was punished as a contempt
In mis- opinion, Brewer, the circuit judge,
said 1T is not the mere stopping of
work, but il IS preventing the owners
from managing their engines and run
ming their cars. That is where the wrong
comes in. Anybody has a right to quit
how the doctrine was enlarged in its ap-
plication. In Re Higgins, q Fed. IA,
decided in April. 1856. Circuit Judge Par
dee, used this language: The employees
of the receivers. pro hac vice officers of
the court, may quit their employment. as
can employees Of private parties or cor
porations. provided they do not thereby
Intentionally disable the property but
they must quit decently and peaceably.
with or without notice, with the object
and intent of Gripping the property or
its operation. l have no doubt that they
thereby commit contempt" In Toledo,
Ann Arbor 4 Northern Michigan Rail-
way Co. VS.. Penn. Co., 81 Fed. 766, Judge
Kicks, while admitting the right of en-
ployees TO quit the service at will. re-
under what may be termed consenting
conditions. But a pretense of quitting
made for the purpose of aiding a boy
colt against another road was denied eff