The age-herald., 1899-03-16
Argument Made by the County
 Commissioners, ANSWER IN HAWKINS CASE Claims Based on Article XIV of
 Federal Constitution. GOVERNOR HAD NOT AUTHORITY To Have Books and Accounts of Com missioners Examined is Another Claim Declared by Lawa
 Court of Record.
GOVERNOR HAD NOT AUTHORITY

Court of Record.
 The county commissioners contend that the act creating the board of revenue is unconstitutional They base this claim on section of article XIV of the constitution of the United States. which provides that no state shall pass any law that will de- without due process of law, and on article VII of the state constitution, which is in conformity with article XIV of the consti- tuition of the United States.
 In their answer in the case of Roberts & Son vs. County Treasurer Kenneth Hawkins, which has already been prepared, they admit all minor facts and submit the case on the constitutionaity of the act under which the board of revenue was appointed.
 The grounds are set forth in section 10 of the answer. which is as follows:
 Ihs Grounds Set Forth
 
 QO And respondent further charges that said pretended act is null and void, for that the same is in direct violation of so much of section one CD of Article XIV. of the constitution of the United States as provides that: "No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abrdge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of it's laws" And respondent charges that said pretended act shows by its terms effect was to remove from office the said named members of the said court of county commissioners without trial or opportunity to be heard, in open and direct violation and denial of the rights secured to said officers by said Article : VII. of the constitution of the state of
 
 ton of said article. *
 Did Not Have Auti O .ity
 The answer then sets forth that the act was passed through the efforts of the gov ernor, and that he had no authority to have the books and accounts of the county com missioners examined. A part of section Il is as follows:
 ''The said acts of said governor were all done and performed by him, acting in his official character and under color of his of- ficial authority, and were performed in the following manner, to-wit: J. G. Cowan, holding the public state office of assistant examiner of public accounts, under the gen. eral laws of Alabama, was charged with the duty of examining the accounts of the re- ceiving and disbursing officers of the state in the manner prescribed in the general law, whenever directed by the governor, and was also charged with the duty of examin- ing the accounts of officers of the counties authorized by law to receive and disburse county funds. whenever directed by the governor, upon the address and request of ten citizens of the county, and to make re- port Ol HIS 10 the JuQgo or the circuit court of the judicial circuit in which the county was situated. No report is au- thorized to be made to the governor, and that official has no further connection with or duty to perform in reference to said ex- animation. The said court of county com missioners was and Is a judicial tribunal. declared by law to be court of record. and though charged by law with the per- formance of ministerial duties, its func- tions and duties are very largely of a judi cial nature. The said court, nor any mem- Der thereof, is authorized by law, in any event or contingency, to receive or dis purse public money of any character. and can have no accounts to be examined" The answer then reiterates that the goy- ernor had no right to direct the examina- tion, and that had 1t not been for him the act would not have been passed.
 The case will come up for argument in the city court Saturday. Head & Wood and Bowman & Harsh are the attorneys for the commissioners who prepared the an- swer.