Ottumwa semi-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1899-1903, 1901-01-10

*** . !. - = n y **ss
Washington, Iowa, Jan. g. .,
(SpeciaD-Judge A. r. Dewey, of
y ruled to set aside the Titus .
= day, on the grounds that the
amendment was not legally SUBJ
T : mitted by the legislature, and was
not legally. adopted, and is now no :.
part of the constitution of Iowa.
Senator Geo. M. Titus, of Mus y
catine, and other leading officials
= of the state were there and the
court room was crowded. =
ss* ** s* ** *#* y
Notices of appeal were given at
once, and the case will be docketed in
a few days in the supreme court, and
a motion will be made to advance it
to the head of the calendar, SO it. can
be submitted to the supreme court on
the first day of the term which be-
gins January Is. 1t is thought that
the decision will be handed down by
the supreme court at some time dur
February 8. The action of the SUI
= pISlllS COuII VIII U6 WdLCuGu cdSSlly.
but the general concensus of the opin-
ion here is that the decision of Judge
] Dewey will not be reversed.
The decision of this case is far
reaching, and affects substantially
every office-holder in the state Of
Iowa. The attention of the whole
state has been directed toward this
case and the action of the court, here.
Everyone has been anxiously awaiting
It's outcome. The leading officials OF
the state were determined to max
this the contest case above all others,
for the testing of the Titus amend
ment providing for biennial elections.
The case was planned some time ago,
by Attorney General Remley, Attor-
j ney General-elect Mullan and Hon.
4 George M.STitus, of Muscatine, the au-
thor Of the measure; and the agree
ment then was, that it should be sub
mitted to Judge A. r. Dewey at the
opening of the January term of court
here, today. Consequently, when the
court opened, Marsh w Bailey, coun.
ty attorney-elec of Washington coun-
ty, designated in the petition as the
relator, called the attention of the
court to the fact that S. w. Brook
hart, the old county attorney, respond
ent in the petition, had refused to
give up the Office; Mr.. Bailey asked
& the court that he be permitted to file
a petition in quo warranto, and pros
ecute it in the name of the state in or
y der to GUST Mr.. Brookhart from the Of
fee of county attorney. Having re-
ceived permission of Judge Dewey to
do SO, he at once filed the petition,
titling the case state of Iowa ex rel,
Marsh W. Bailey, plaintiff VS.. S. w.
Brookhart, defendant" which petition
recited that the relator had been
elected county attorney of Washing
7 ton county at the general election No
vember 6, 1900; that he had qualified
s for the office as required by law; that
/ he had made demand upon the de-
defendant to turn over the office, but
p he refused, claiming that his term OF
Z Office had been extended one year by
the Titus amendment. To this petit
5 ton, Mr.. Brookhart waived time, and
Immediately filed a demurrer, admit
4 ting the facts of the petition, but
claiming that his term of Office was
extended y the Titus amendment
and that consequently he was entitled
to hold over another year. The argu-
ments had all been prepared in writ
ing, and had been submitted to Judge
Dewey, so that he was fully advised
and had put his opinion in writing.
The Opinion.
In the opinion the reader should
keep in mind that the "relator' men,
toned many times in the document,
I is The new officer and the respond
s9<.y, is4 tho 11I pfF i
After reviewing the case at length
and quoting literally from the CON
stiution and from authorities as to
whether or not the full text of the
amendment should be entered in full
on the journal of the house, and COM
ing down to the vote of the people
on the question, the court says:
For the purpose of this opinion we
find it unnecessary to quote from the
records further as to the course taken
by the 28th general assembly, as it
appears no contention arises in this
case as to the legitimate course pur-
sued by that body in approving the
action of the 9th general assembly,
and that the same was submitted to
the people at the general election in
1900 and a liberal majority voting
thereon expressed their approval Of
such proposed amendment.
The court offers no apology for this
extended quotation from the record
as it feels it to be absolutely neces-
sary to do SO to arrive at correct
solution Of the issue under considera-
ton. 1t will be observed that no.
where in the record of the house pro-
.ceedings does the record disclose to
us the text of the amendment pro-
posed to be submitted to the people
except as it is referred to by title as
coming from the senate.
On the issue of the case our atten-
ton is called to that part of the con-
stitution providing for its amendment
and contained in Section /, hereinbe-
fore quoted and especially to the
language used, when it says, land il
the same shall be agreed to by a ma
jority of the members elected to each
of the two houses, such proposed