The news & observer., 1901-03-07

press terms, repealed the charters OF the
different hospitals and asylums, and
abolished the Offices held by the defend
ants The defendants contended on the
other hand that while the Legislature
had directly and in express words re-
paaled the charters and abolished the
Offices, such repeal ard abolition were
oaly colorado. inasHuch as the hospi-
tails were Immediately re-cbartcrcd and
similar offices re-created.
Tire following extracts are from tho
brief OF the defendants counsel in Lush
1 VI Sawyer, which was for the possessions
OF the offices Of the Morganton Asylum
"rhe purpose of the Legislature, on
lis face, is 10 get the old officers out.
M legitimate public policy Is subseryed
hr calling an old established institutions
Western Hospital instead OF state Hos,
pital, changing its official board from
ne directors to nine trustees. and it's
superintendent into a president anG
resident physician All the duties re-
/ n ain the same The changes we're an
4 50 triiing that there is no escape from
/ declaring, what everybody knows, that
| the acts were intended to get rid OF ;ae
/ officers. and nothing more
"The ease OF Soon Hing V. Crawley
! l13 u. s., 703, relied on by plaintiffs. ls
| broad enough to allow an inquiry here:
/ The rule is general with reference to
! the enactment of al legislative bodies,
4 that the courts cannot inquire into the
Totive5 of the legislators in passing
ihem. except as they may be disclosed
on the face of the acts or inferribe from
/ their operation considered with refer
! eace TO the condition Of the country and
existing legislation In the light Of this
rule, the purpose is manifest. State
1 department was efficiently officered and
we'll conducted. change of political
parties had taken place and il was de-
/ sired that all the old incumbents should
| give way &c men of tho dominant faith.
All this may be inferred from the opera
tons Of the acts considered with reference
to tho condition Of the country aud exist
ing legislation
I'VE submit that tho proper coustruc-
tiOn Of the act will simply give i; a
| prospective operation, change the namo
Of the institution and it's officers. but
leave ali officers to serve out their time
The act is plainly modification or
amendment Of the old law, and any uu.
necessary parts Of it. such as the mpcs
sible requirement for organizing on the
9th OF March (the day the nominations
wore sent in) must give way 10 tho true
state of the case.
'If this rul" is adopted. there is 10 au-
| imadversion on the Legislature. But il
this cannot be applied there is no escape
from the conclusion that the statute was
merely intended to get rid of the present
officers
"Wo DO not mean to inquire into the
a..
! alIege that they were not actuated BY
| what they considered public motives.
! That Is an inquiry into which we may
| not enter. But VIC do say that the pur-
pose Of this act. when viewed in cor
nection with the history of the times. is
/ to change the officers of the asyums"
/ The following extracts are from the
| brief filed by the counsel for the defend
ants in the case of Pearson v. Souther-
land. fcr the possession of tho offices OF
the Goldsboro Asylum:
j. The defendants admit that the
| power of the Legislature TO repeal the
charter. and thus to destroy the nsti-
tuition. and To abolish the Office CT super
intendent and director, and thus put an
end to their tenure
Il. The question then for the court Is
! TO decide whether they have done this.
iii. The defendants deny that the
Legislature has the right or power to
leave the Offices in existence and transfer
! them from John r. Miller and the board
( of directors to Abner Alexander and the
hoard of trustees named under the new
act.
NV. 1t will therefore be important for
! the court to consider whether the offices
( -
the Legislature has endeavored to trans
fer them to the plaintiff.
/ " To do this il will be necessary to
consider the identity of the institution
end of the Offices" p
/ 1t being apparent that tho effeet OF the
Hesitation contained in this bill was not
TO repeal the charters or destroy these
institutions, but az most to change
their names, and hardly that with refer
ence to the Eastern Hospital let us sec
| whether il has the effect TO abolish the
4 Offices aud nut an end to the tenure OF
| the Offices II IS true that section 5 OF
said bill says: THAT the office Of super
intendent Of the Eastern North Carolina
! Hospital. North Carolina Insane Asylum
and the North Carolina Hospital for the
insane are hereby abolished" but the
/ same reasoning with reference 10 the re-
peal OF a statute must be applicable to
! the adjustment OF An office; and if il
can be seen from the bill that the office
is not abolished. it is not abolished. even
! though the act expressly says that it is
! II is true the name may have been
changed to president and resident ply
siciau and the name of directors to
trustees but the offices have not been
abolished
| applying the reasoning OF this. one OF
/ the first courts of the world CNew York
1 Court of Appeals) to our case. it does
/ seem that VIC must conclude that super-
intendent and president aud resident
| physician must be one and the same offce.
They have the same functions and duties
/ and the additional duties such as ONLY
| may be prescribed by the board of trus
tees, IL it chance the law at all. surely
cannot make II new office and that il
does not change the law is apparent from
sections 2247 and 1854 OF the Code. which
empower the directors TO direct. manage
| and make bylaws for the institution.
/ which may, and SO prescribe such duties
for the superintendent as is thought ad-
visable, not enumerated in the Code. If