Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1902-07-23
DECISION POSTPONED
The Case of the Justices of
the Peace.
B R E F A RGU M E Mt
COLL0QUY BETWEEN JUSTICE
BUNDY AND JUDGE HAGNER.
Question Must Be Decided by the Full
Court on Account of Impor-
tance to Community.
B R IEF A RGU M EN- T

The case which involves the question Of
the legality OF the appointment Of the JUS
tices of the peace of the District of Column
bia, styled as Simon N Myer against
Charles S. Bundy, came up for hearing be-
fore Justice Hagner of the Supreme Court
this morning After brief argument by
counsel on both sides, Justice Hagner de-
cided to postpone the trial of the question
until the first Tuesday in October when
the regular term begins
In stating his reasons for the postponment
of the case Justice Hagner said that the
vacation term of the Supreme Court was
for the trial of exigencies and OF such
causes from their nature demanded i'm
mediate attention and involved hardship
towards the parties concerned.
The vacation term. he declared, is not de-
signed for the deciding of general ques-
tions of law to settle matters that should
more properly be considered during the
regular term.
He also suggested that If by his decision
a this time the justices of the peace were
suspended. it would work a great calamity
to the community, and that such a condi-
ton, in the intere SITS of justice TO the peo-
Tle, should be averted.
The attorneys in the case were Julius 7.
Peyser and Robert Meyer for the plaintiff
and Judge c. C. Cole and Henry F. Wood
ward for the defendant
The Arguments.
Mr.. Peyser told the court that his reason
for bringing up the case was because the
rights of his client had been infringed upon.
and that Mr.. Meyer would otherwise be de-
prived of hIs right to the enjoyment of his
property which was vouchsafed in the
Constitution of the United States
Judge Cole suggested to the court that
the case be decided today. as he thought
there was no doubt thai upon a perusal of
the facts ii would be found the justices
were holding their respective offices under
authority of tha-laW
Some amusement was caused by the dia-
loSue between Mr. Bundy and judge Hag-
nor when the former. speaking by pe rmis-
sion Of the court, said
Your honor / would ike to have this
case decided right away. because If I am
not legally appointed and If l am not hold
ing the office of justice OF the peace rightly,
l do not want il at ALL
You can easily get rid of it IL IT is
troubling you any and is a burden" replied
Judge Hagner. your wishes can't have
anything to do with this matter for the
welfare of the community must be con-
sidered.'
After further argument and explanations
by counsel it decided to lay the case
over until the fall term.
Origin of the Case.
This case is the outcome of a suit insti-
tuted July / by Henry A. Willard against
Simon N. Meyer, to gain possession of
premises 1411 Pennsylvania avenue,
through ejectment proceedings. The origi-
nal case was brought before Charles S.
Bundy. Justice of the peace, whose author
ity to issue summons against Mr.. Meyer
is denied by him on the grounds that the
justice was not legally appointed TO his
office.
At the trial of the case by the justice,
July IL, Mr.. Bundy held that he was prop
erly appointed, and after hearing the claim
of Mr.. Willard rendered judgment in his
favor. Notice Of an appeal from this de-
cision given by counsel for Mr.. Meyer.
The claim of Mr.. Meyer against Mr..
Bundy is that the latter was appointed by
the President under a provision Of the new
code, which went into effect January /,
1902; but that the appointment of the JUS
tices of the peace was made by the Presi-
dent the 10th of December and confirmed
the next day by the Senate, and from this
fact Mr.. Meyer, through his counsel, argues
that the justices are holding office without
authority, because they were appointed be-
fore the code became operative.
The petition of Mr.. Meyer llled about ten
days ago asking the court to issue writ
of certiorari requiring Mr.. Bundy to ccr-
tlfy the papers in the original case to the
Supreme Court for & hearing, also states
that by reason of the summons which was
made returnable the 11th day of July, 1892,
and also in accordance with section q of
the code of law for the District of Colum-
bia, he is deprived of the right of a trial by
fringement Of the seventh amendment to
the Constitution of the United States.
which guarantees the right of trial by jury
in terms plain and emphatic
The matter today was brought up on The
answer of Justice of the Peace Bundy, who
was cited to show cause why ne exercises
the powers of the office of justice of the
peace.