The commonwealth. (Scotland Neck, N.C.) 1896-1929, 1899-04-20
JUDGE CLARK DfS SENT.

JUDGE CL4EK's DISSENT.
Justice Montgomery, u The Supreme
..orrt rendered the decision IL The
Day case, to when we referred brlefl.
last week.
There b:s been no decision by on:
SuDren,, court in a long time that hac
been looked for with SO much interest
perhaps: and the decision hes been reaG
and STUDIED carefully by t;le lawyer
OF the State. Not oaca have We hearc
it said that Justice Montgomery opin-
ion was an able one.
Justice Walter Clark dissented from
the opinion Of the court and his dissen;
has been spoken OF as very able pa
psr.
Judge Clark takes Judge Montgom
ery's own citations and argues abb.
aqainst him. We have not the spact
to give the decision and Judge Clark s
dissenting opinion, which is much fui-
Ter than the decision rendered by Judge
Montgomery.
Judge Clarx;s dissent gives an ex-
haustlye review of the law and decisions
bearing on the case, and he has rend-
cred the State good service for which
he will receive the gratitude Of thous-
ands at his fellow citizens.
The Biblical Recorder in reviewing
the case says in part of Justice Mont
gomery,s opinion.
Justice Montgomery denies that tbs.
enactment intended to abolish Mr.
Days office succeeds in its purpose.
The name is abolished, but the funct-
ions remain. A public Office Is private
property ; and an officer duly appoint
ed is entitled to his Office for the full.
term, not only entitled to its emolu-
ments and privileges, but to the per-
tori: Go CT lis da::::c,,. in his Opln-
ion, that is in the Courts opinion, tht
duties make the Office rather than the
pay. And so long as the duties remain
the office remains. That is, the Legls-
lature cannot get rid of an officer before
the expiration of his term simply b,
abollshing the Office it must also ab-
rogate its duties.
The object of this ruling of the Court
is to prevent measures, not unknown
these recent changeful years in oui
Commonwealth, designed to GUST Off
GERS OF one party whose terms extend
oyer into the day of ascendency of an
other party and that il a good pur-
pose.
OF Justice Clark's dissent it says in
part:
Justice Clark writes his dissenting
opinion as if he were writing a speech
He does not hesitate to strike note
now and then that, sounded from &
platform, would bring forth applause
He argues to the point that the Office
has been abolished. The Court has
said that it was not. He says that il
has been, quotes the act abolishing it.
declares the power of the Legislature to
abolish, and, apparently, quotes Judges
Montgomery and Douglass as deliver
ing decisions of the Court in previous
cases that sustain his declaration. The
shot is we'll aimed for a layman's eye.
He goes on to argue that the character
of the management of the Prison has
been utterly changed, to-wit, from "cne
man power" to three-men power, and
that the change thus made was sought
upon grounds OF public spirit rather
than personal spite, suggesting that
the Court Is in the attitude Of regard
ing the General Assembly as plotting
subterfuge, suggestion that his fellow
Justice, Mr.. Furches, rerels with con-
siderable feeling. After this he turns
to suggest that at most MIR. Day might
be entitled to compensation for the
balance OF his term, but even this is
untenable. Office-holders must die
with their Offices. And finally he de-
clares that tho courts cannot enter the
legislative department and set aside a
law unless it is clearly in conflict witt,
the Constitution and we have a hint
Of usuryation.
OF the effects of the opinion the Re-
corder concludes
There ls variety of specnlations as
to the effect OF this decision. Indeed.
the importance of the matter hinges
upon what shall come of it rather than
amply upon Mr.. Days tenure. There
is confusion at large. The acumen