The sun., 1901-03-30
NOT AsIr USED TO BE.


parent. Somehow the courts of the
State seem to have fallen out with the
versions of the law. A Few
years ago it was common to forecast
court decisions as necessarily favorable to
Democratic contention. A change mas
come and the courts, as we have said,
seem to have fallen out of the line oi
Democratic legal contention. In all the
election cases, trials and decisions grow
ing out of the political movements of the
time, we can recall but one or two Ill
which the Democratic contention was
not sustained in the last thirty or forty
years. 1t is fact that Republicans dis
trusted the State courts, and whenever
possible eases involving Republican po-
itical interests were tried in the United
States courts. The change that mas
come is not only IL cause Tor Republi-
an rejoicing, but one that is creditable
| o the State. The courts are no longer
annexes to II political organization.
| In this regard we cannot help recall
| ing the now historic Kent county man
damus case. In that case, possibly the
most prolonged and hardest fought case
of the kind that ever occurred in the
local courts, every c-ntention OF the
Democratic lawyers was ruled out. We
recall that during that trial, when it be-
.ame certain that the rulings of the
court would be against the Democratic
version of the law governing the work
IF the county return boards, bill was
prepared for presentation to the fraudu-
ent Democratic legislature of 1896, to
repeal the return board law and get il
jut of the way before the court had
reached it's decision. This incident re
vealed a very peculiar Democratic idea
IF the law--that it was an elastic some
hing to be contracted or expanded as thi
The decision of the courts in the Coch
'an-Churehman case is a revision of th
I'D methods, as represented by the plain
siff, his only plea being that he was
: Democrat in Office and objected to bein
J ,lsted by Republican.
! We recall in this matter that tn
municipal court was established as
: method Of getting rid Of the magisterii
II authority of Republican mayor, an
n ,uttin,, tbo o,nnli,uonts nf tho offien iut
Il he pocket of a Democrat. This was
N asc where the Democratic law W;
4 made retroactive and disposessed an of
Is 'er magistrate elected by the peopl
rs md by them authorized to exercise ce
III :ain powers as then defined in the la,
w But like the law intended to repeal Il
.eturn board act, to get rid of what h;
occurred under its provisions, the mur
IN 'ipal court act, amending the city cha
ot | ser, was intended to get rid of what Il
he people had done in the city election
"a 1852, i'll electing a mayor, DR.. ].
IN Wales, to succeed John l.. Almoi
he Mayor Almond presided at the sessio
W, | VI tne clIy court ana was lalu OUT OF I
VI 'ees of the court. To this position I
,cople elected DR.. Naics, and he enter
Ipon the discharge of the duties Of
tiice Months aftcrward, Democra
Se- aw makers at Dover amended the q
mt harter, established municipal col
ter md named the first city judge. III
an Ill this was unjust, and contrary to |,
no Is the people understood it was
cal nitted, hut the known temper of I
zen ourts at that time was adjudged |
ka o any appeal from the Democratic
of erpretaton-the intent-of the law.
be- Wales surrendered. With the pres,
ity 'ourts the result would, doubtless, he
,an been different
of Democratic construction of law, as
tic lddendum to Democratic political pr
he ice, is not as forceful as it was.