Albuquerque daily citizen. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1895-1903, 1900-01-13
THH NE COURT.
Motion for R%eheariug 10 Mountain Electric
Company case D!nied.
Tar JusTo r. ARmIJo SUIT.

The territorial supreme court met
Thursday forenoon with Chief Justice
Mills and Justices Crumpscker, McFie
and Parker on the bench.
Ia case No. 7si, the Mountain Electric
company Of Denver. appellant. vs.. Geo.
Il. Niles, appellee. q suit on q mechan-
les lien, q motion for a rehearing was
denied. The appeal Is from Bernslilio
county. The Mountain Electric com.
pany wired the Armijo hotel at Albuquer.
que, and sued for the amount OF the bill.
In case No. S77, Charles Jones. Asa
Jones and Gabriel Riley. appellants, Va.
the Territory OF New Mexico, appellee,
an appeal from Colfax county, the appeal
had been allowed. but was not perfected.
Upon motion OF the territory the case
was docketed, and then dismissed, and
the Judgment Of the lower conrt affirmed.
The three appellants had been sentenced
to Eve years In the penitentiary for lar.
csny Of cattle.
In cases Nos. $40 and si7, Barbara
Chavez de Armij. plaintiff In error aud
appellant, Va. Justo Il. Arnlijo, defendant
In error a~nd;appellee, error aud appeal
from Bernalillo county. the motion to
quasb the writ OF error and the appeal
was granted and the judgment OF the
lower court affirmed. but no damages
granted. The amount OF judgment 10
t6,097.92 and interest.
Case No. 1874 James NJ. Slgsfu3 ct al,
plaintiff In error. vs. Urbsin 0zsnne. de-
PENDANT In error, writ OF error from Lin
coin county. was called for hearing. but
no appearance was made for either side,
and the q 9 was dismissed at the cost Of
plaintiffs in error, and the judgment Of
the lower court affirmed.
No session OF the court was held Thurs
day afternoon. A case docketed for Fri
day Is OF widespread interest, and will DO
the first called, No. S35, Samuel Eldodt,
plaintiff In error, vs.. the Territory, ex
rel. john II. Vaughn. defendant 10 error.
The case Is a sequel to the removal OF
Hon. Samuel Eliodt a. treasurer Of the
territory and the appointment Of Hon j..
II. Vaughn to succeed him. MI. Eldodt
claims that the governor had no right TO
appoint his successor without the advice
and consent OF the Legislative council.
Nc. Eldodt will be represented by Hon.
T. b. Catron and Judge N. B. Laughlin.
The territory will be represented by So.
licitor General II. l.. Bartlett.
FRIDAYS PROCEEDINGS.
The supreme court NIT Friday fore
noon with Chief Justice Mills and Asso-
ciate Justices ~Crumpacker aud Parker on
the bench. Judge McFis was not on the
bench. M the case which occupied the
courts attention had been tried In the
lower court before him.
The case up for hearing was No. 835.
Samuel Eidodt, plaintiff In error, Va. The
Territory OF New Mexico, en- rel John H.
Vaughn, defendant In error.
The opening argument was made by
Judge N. B. Lsughlin, followed by Solic.
itor General X l.. Bartlett. He was fol.
lowed by Hon. 7. b. Cstron, who, with
Judge Llughlin, represents the plaintiff
In error.
The matter at Issue In this case Is
possession OF the office of treasurer OF
the territory Of New Mexico, to which
John II. Vaughn was appointed by Gov
ernor 0.ero, and which office. after q
contest In the lower court before Judge
McFie. was awarded him. The sttor-
neys for Mr.. Eldodt claim that no such
vacancy ss could be filled by appoint.
ment by the executive existed, and that
he Is entitled to the office. The solicitor
general argues that the executive had
full power to make the appointment.
Case No. 1886. Anastacio Torres, plain
tiff In error. vs. The Board Of County
Commissioners Of Socorro county, de-
fendant In error, Is another important
case aud was argued late yesterday after
noon The plaintiff Is superintendent
OF schools OF Socorro county. and sues
for salary which he alleges Is due him.
He contests the constitutionality OF the
law passed by the last legislature max
Ing Socorro and Grant counties of the
third class. as far as county school
superintendent and their salaries are con-
cerned. The point made by Hon. 8.
Alexander. attorney for Torres, is that
the territorial court has no power to re.
view acts Of the legislative assembly OF
the territory Of New Mexico.