The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1901-04-29
meet ON MONDAY
City Council Will Then Meet in
Regular Session.
IF Contest Is Appealed Must Be
Done by Council.

There will be no meeting Of the city
council until next Monday evening un-
less a special meeting is called.
If an appeal from Judge Hazen's de-
cision is made it must be by the council
and then the city would have to pay
the expense Of the appeal.
If no appeal is taken then the council
must give Mr.. Parker a certificate at
the next meeting.
There seems to be no inclination on
the part Of the council to refuse to obey
Judge Hazen's order.
Councilman Clancy said today:
Il shall obey Judge Hazen's order. II
Mr.. Hughes is wise he viii not try TO
force US to confirm any appointments"
H. S. Nichols Of the Fifth ward said.
I have no disposition to disobey Judge
Hazen's order. do not think MIR.
Hughes will try to make any appoint
ments-'
Councilman J. S Warner Of the Fifth
ward said: Il suppose that the only
thing to de win be to declare the result
according to Judge Hazen's order. it
seems TO me our duty IS plain and / am
in favor of doing our duty I do NOT
believe in the face of this decision that
MIR. Hughes would ask us to confirm
any appointments"
The effects of the judgment Of the
court in the Parker Hughes mandamus
case is still a point Of discussion.
In his opinion Judge Hazen said.
suance of the writ in this case would be
fruitless or unavailing, for we must as-
sumo that the person holding a certih-
cate resulting from a lawful canvass
viii be permitted under that certificate
to qualify and enter upon the duties Of
the office"
An attorney who has studied this case
carefully said of this clause:
Under such a decision it is plainly
the duty of the council to refuse to con-
firm any appointn ents made by Colonel
Hughes If he should make any. The
presumption is that he VIII not make
them. but should he do. SO the council
ought not to show any disrespect
toward the order of the court by issu-
ing a certificate to Parker and then re-
fusing to recognize him. 1t is the plain
duty of the council when the certificate
is issued to see that It is given full force
and effect by Parker. who will have the
only legal certificate. and that cer-
tificate entities him TO possession Of the
Office and the right to perform the
duties of the office of Mayo Tt would
be plain violation of the duty Of the
council to issue a certificate and then
refuse to recognize Parker.
Then again, the members Of the
council are the only ones who can ap-
peal from he decision of the council.
Hughes has resigned as councilman and
he has no right to appeal The council
has a right to do so. The judgment OF
the district court is against the coun-
ell and not against Hughes. Hughes
can mot appeal unless ordered to sign
the certificate Of election.
1T win be strange If the city council
appeals a case. in which the council has
no interest, and run the risk Of paying
costs in the present case and in the su-
prene court. 1t would seem that a legal
canvass shows Parker elected. and if
the case is to be contested IL Is the
plain duty of the council to let Hughes
contest by quo warranto or such pro-
ceedings as he chooses to bring and not
for the council to assume Hughes bur
dens and fight the case for him. Tt is
custom airy for boards Of canvassers to
accept returns and name persons shown
on the returns to be elected. and then
let the party with the grievance go to
court and fight his own case
''Canvassing boards never assume
that their certificates. though issued
under order of the court are invalid or
erroneous. and it is unheard Of that
they should issue certificates and then
appeal from their own decision to get q
court to declare 1t invalid"