The Caucasian. (Clinton, N.C.) 188?-1913, 1901-03-14

Cotton W. Ellis aud other case
mentioned awhile ago. Now. Mr..
Speaker Ii the ssSl.i5, FOR which
White brought suit, asking man
damus, had been sct apart by the
act OF 1897 and 1899, smcndatory
thereto, H. his salary for -ervics- a.
Chief inspector OF the Shell Fish
Industry OF North Carolina, ask
in the name of law, justice and rra-
SON, why should that salary be de-
why should these Judges be inn
peached because they confirmed =
judgement Of the lower court grant
ing the writ OF mandAmus 10 en-
force the collection OF this salary,
which is admitted by all as having
been set apart by the acts Of 1897,
and 1899, amendatory thereto: Mr..
Speaker, We have had many quota
tions made from the Bible In this
discussion, all Of which am glad
To hear, for the reason, when men
are well grounded in Biblical know
ledge they do not usually go wrong.
The Bible Is the best law book In the
world-it contains law enough for
the citizenship Of the universe, and
when am surrounded by men, who
are versed in its history, i feel a. if
1 were surrounded as by great
fortress, impenetrable and insur-
mOuntable. Then desire TO ap-
peal to thinking men, conscientious
men, GOd-loving men and God-ser-
wing men, to arise above party
spirit and party lines and do their
duty in this matter, though the
heavens fall. Mr.. Speaker, it is
fixed principal in law, that there is
no wrong for which there is not a
corresponding method Of redress,
and that there Is a way by which
all rights can be preserved. If Mr..
White was appointed to the office of
Chief Inspector Of the Shell Fish
Industry for four years he was en-
titled to the salary, and if he did
not get it, he had a means Of redress
by applying to the courts for writ
Of mandamus. 1t was decided in
Bailey VS.. Caldwell 6S n. &. 472,
that the Legislature might alter,
amend or repeal an act fixing a sal
ary, yet if the convention tas in
this instance) provides that a reason
able compensation shall be made for
the services mentioned, the Legis-
lature could not abolish altogether
pay or salary without fixing another
compensation which they deem rea-
sonable. In other words, Mr.. Speak
er, the Legislature has the power to
decrease the salary of an officer, but
50 long as the office exists, they can
not deprive the incumbent Of the
benefits OF the salary-they cannot
deny to him the benefits Of the sal
ary, for the reason, to do this would
be to undertake to ''starve him out''
of the Office, or, in other words to
do by indirection that which they
are lot permitted to do by direc-
tiun, and l am sure this is propO-
sition for which no one would con-
tend, seriously, for a moment. Mr.
Speaker, a great many things have
been said about this body being anal
ogous to a grand jury. L cannot
agree to this proposition for the
reason, that the grand jury is Sc
cret body and only hears the State:
side of the testimony, acts upon nj
presentments made by itself
but such presentments are act
ed upon by a subsequent grand jury
The defendants are never permitted
to introduce testimony to be acted
upon by grand jury. In this cas-
both sides of the question have beer
presented. 1t would be close anal
ogy to say, in my opinion, We ar
in the position of a Justice Of tn
Peace, where he has no jurisdiction
except an inquisitorial one; in sucl
cases he cannot acquit or convict
but discharges or binds to court O
competent jurisdiction, as the evi
dence in the case justifies. His frs
inquiry is, has a crime been com
mitted; the second, Is there proba
BILE cause to believe the defendan
> guilty of the crime as charged il
the warrant? That is what We ar
doing in this case. 1t is our duty
as sworn members of this body, I
ascertain, first, as to whether or nc
!, the high crimes and misdemeanOr
in office have been committed as a
legged in this resolution, and If W
, should so find, and / cannot see ho'
this can be done, then it is our dut
to find as to whether or not thoe
Judges have acted corruptly. know
ingly, wilfully and Intentionally
: being unmindfuI Of their high pos
tion as the Supreme Court Of Mort
Carolina, in issuing the writ {
mandamus in the case of White "
Auditor.
l do maintain further, Mr.. Speal
er and gentlemen, until we do
;. find that we ought not to send the
judges to the bar Of the Senate
. North Carolina, there to answer
! charge of high crimes and misd
> meanors in Office.
!. Now, Mr.. Speaker, / wish to res
from the 125 n. c., 206, of Abbo
- VS.. Beddingfield. Justice Furch
writes the opinion of the Coul
Justice Montgomery answers al
Justice Clark writes dissentiI
r. opinion. Furches, in deliveriI
n the opinion Of the Court, sal
p ssContemporaneOus legislation abo
% the same subject matter is in Pc
v materia, and may be read and CO
10 strued together. Wilson vs. JOrda