The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1899-01-13
THEIR OFFICES CONTESTED.
CONTINUED from Eighth Page)

The annual report of Hon. J. ]. McDou-
ough, Mayor of the city of Savannah, for
the year 1893, is quoted in support of this
position. IN abiding to the City Court
in his report. Mayor McDonough stated
that owing to the grade of business trans
acted there the court had become a very
necessary one TO the public, but took posi-
ton that the court was for all practi-
cal purposes county and not a city court
aud that there was no reason why the
city should be required 10 pay any part of
the expense of the court. Cases were sent
from the Police Court to the Superior
Court in the same manner that they were
sent to the City Court, he argued and yet
the city was not called upon 10 bear any
expense of the Superior Court. Mayor Nc
Donough said in his report that it was
true that the clerk and sheriff of the City
Court were elected by Council, but as
they were not connected with the city in
any way in the performance of their du-
ties, were not under the control of the
Mayor or the city government, and their
services were not rendered in any way in
the interest of The city, as a corporation
it did not seem proper that the city should
be encumbered with the payment for the
services of these officers and other ex-
penses of the court.
The fact is cited that under the act of
1894, providing for the election of city Of
ficers by the incoming Council on the first
Monday succeeding the city election and
terminating the terms of those in office
upon the day of such election by Council,
that W. p. Bailey and W. f. Blois were
then respectively serving as clerk and
sheriff of the City Court, and that the
Mayor and aldermen elected all city Of
fcers provided for in the act, but did not
elect successors to Messrs. Bailey and
Blois, who remained in office until Jan.
1 following. Wherefore, the petitioners
claim the Mayor and aldermen are estop-
ped from considering them city officers
and from denying that they are state and
county officers.
The petitions claim that the act Of 1898
under which Council acted in electing their
successors, is unconstitutional, because Of
the title of the act being limited to the
fixing of the time for the election of "city
officers" and as this is extended in the
body of the act to include the clerk and
sheriff of the City Court, that the act is
more comprehensive than its title, and is
therefore in violation of the section of the
constitution regulating the form of such
acts The act is also claimed to be I'M
constitutional because it does not distinct
ly describe or in any other matter refer
TO the act of Nov. %, 1895, upon which it
operates as a repeal.
The. papers in the case were laid before
Judge Fa1ligant in the afternoon and or
ders issued requiring the defendants to
appear at noon Saturday to show cause
why they should not surrender their Of
fees to the contestants. Mr.. S. b. Adams,
the city attorney, will represent the pres
ent incumbents. Mr.. Adams is said to be
very confident that the position of the city
is sthe correct one, and that the former
officers have no legal claim upon the Of
fees in question. Mr.. Lawrence and his
clients state on the other hand, that they
have secured opinions from several of the
leading legal authorities of the state, sus-
tanning them in their position in the most
positive manner. The case Will undoubt-
edly be carried to the Supreme Court. The
law in quo warranto proceedings requires
that the judge must appoint a hearing
within ten days after the proceedings have
been fled and that he must render his
decision within ten days after hearing the
question. The law also requires that the
Supreme Court shall give such matters
it's attention at the earliest opportunity.
This being the case, the question is enc
which is likely to be determined within
the next few weeks.