The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1899-11-22
BEDDINGFIELD Is 0USTED
THE OFFICE AND RECORDS TO
BE SURRENDERED
AND REPORT BE MADE BACK TO COURT
The Opinion of the Court Is Written by Judge
Furches. Judge Walter Clark Files
Very Strong Dissenting
Opinion.

The Supreme Court yesterday filed its
decision in the case of Abbott VS.. Bed
dingield for the office of Corporation
Commissioner.
As predicted in this paper two weeks
ago this decision was in favor of Abbott
Rep.) The principle on which it is de-
cided is the same as that enunciated in
the cases of Day VS.. State Prison, and
Wilson vs. Jordan: that the Corporation
Commission act did not repeal the Rail
road Commission act, and that the two
acts and all laws amendatory thereto
are to be construed together-in pari
materia.
The opinion of the court, together with
the writ issued therefrom, is:
T. That Abbott is entitled to the
office of Corporation Commissioner and
the salary thereof from April 1st 1899.
the day he was ousted from the office.
2 That Beddingfeld is not entitled
to the office. and must put Abbott in
possession of it together with all the
books, papers and records and make re-
turn to the court on Tuesday, November
18th. 1899.
3. That Beddingfeld be taxed with
the costs of the case.
The opinion of the court is written
by Judge Furches A strong dissenting
opinion is written by Judge Walter
Clark This dissent is printed elsewhere
in this paper.
Judge Furches' Opinion.
IT, fnl1
The General Assembly of 1891, chap
ter 800, passed and ratified an act es-
tablishing a Railroad Commission to
consist of three commissioners. Under
the provisions of this act The rrlator
Abbott on the -- day of March, 1897,
was duly elected one of the three COM
missioners, provided for I'm the act, for a
term of six years thence next ensuing.
Under this election he was, on the
first day of April, 1897. duly qualified
and indicted into said office, and con-
tinued therein and performed the du-
ties thereof and exercised the powers
and privileges pertaining to said office,
until the first of April, 1888; when the
defendant Beddingfied, as the relator al
leges, with the aid and connivance OF
the other two members CT said com.
missionD unlawfully entered into. t13k
possession of and ousted the reator of
his said office. and that the said Bed
dingfield continues to unlawfully hold
said office and to prevent the relator
from entering into the same or to ex-
ercise the duties and functions thereof.
The defendant admits that he entered
into the office and ousted the relatoT
therefrom. But he says he did so with
n. q Ioxx 4hof ho &c n
has been lawfully holding and perform
ing the duties and exercising the func-
lions of said office ever since he so law
fully entered into the samIa.
The defendant says the General As
sembly, on the 9th day of March, 1899
passed an act (chapter 500 which repeal
ed the act of 1891 (chapter 300 under
which the relafor was elected; and that
ON the 9th of March, 1899, said Gen
eral Assembly passed another act CHAP
ter 164) which established Corpora
ton Commission" to consist of three
commissioners, and he was duly elect
ed. qualified and indicted into the said
office under said act of the 9th of
March, 1899, and rightfully holds the
same and exercises the duties and
functions of said office under said act
and said election.
We mote the fact that the defendant
alleges in his answer that chapter 30;
was passed and ratified on the 4th day
of March. 1899 But there is no fmdine
Of the court as to this allegation. tnt
burden of which was on the defendant
And as it appears from the printee
volume of the Laws of 1899 that it wa
ratified on the 9th day of March, 1899
1re will so treat If although it is prob
able that it is not very material whethe
it was passed ON the 4th or the 9TH.
This brings us to the consideration o