The Washington times., 1902-07-14
Legal Inquiry Into Right
of Presidential Ap-
polntment.
HEARING ON WEDNESDAY
Outgrowth of Suit Filed by Mr.. Henry
A. Willard Against Mr.. Simon N.
Meyer-Contest Similar to That of
Jurys Recently Decided.

The hearing on the question of the
constitutionality OF the appointment of
the ten local justices OF the peace by
the President, in December last, which
will be had before Chief Justice Bing-
ham, of the Supreme Court of the Dis
trict. on Wednesday, is awaited with
much interest by members of the local
bar
The matter will come up on the an
swer OF Justice OF the Peace Bundy,
who is cited to show cause on the day
named why he exercises the powers of
the Office OF justice OF the peace.
Outgrowth of Suit.
The issuing of the rule against Mr..
Bundv is the outgrowth of a suit filed
by MIR. Henry A. Willard against Mr..
Simon N. Meyer. to gain possession CT
premises 1411 Pennsylvania Avenue,
through ejectment proceedings.
When the case came on for hearing
on Saturday. Mr.. Meyers counsel. Ju-
lius /. Peyser. questioned Mr.. Bundy's
power to act in the matter, on the
ground that he was not legally appointed
to the office the duties of which he ex-
ercised.
The justice held that he was properly
appointed, and after hearing the claim
of Mr. Willard on its merits gave judg-
ment in his favor. Counsel for Mr..
Meyer gave notice of an appeal from
this judgment, and will have six days in
which to perfect the appeal.
Question of Constitutionality.
In the meantime the question of the
constitutionality of Mr.. Bundy's ap-
pointment will come up for considera-
tion in the Supreme Court of the Dis
trict. In this connection it may be
stated that Mr.. Meyer. one day last
week, filed a petition for q writ of Ger
tiorari in the Supreme Court of the
District. asking that Justice of the
Peace. Bundy be required to file certi-
fed copies OF all papers under which ne
claims to exercise the powers Of the Of
fee OF justice OF the peace.
In speaking of the matter on Satur-
day. Mr.. Peyser stated that If the lower
courts decide against his client he will
take the matter to the Court of Appeals
for the District. The appointment OF
the justices OF the peace by the Presi-
dent in December last, Mr.. Peyser con-
tends. was clearly without authority of
law.
The power to make the appointments.
he stated. was given the President by
the code. This. however, did not go into
effect until fifteen days after the ap-
pointments were made and the nominal
tions confirmed by the Senate. The en-
acting clause of the code specified that
il was to become operative and OF ef-
feet on January /. 1902.
Ten Justices Named.
On December 16, 1901, the President
named ten persons for the Office OF jus
tice OF the peace in the District, and on
the following day. December II, the
were confirmed by the Senate.
and before January l, 1902 the persons
so nominated and confirmed took their
oaths of office.
Until the code became operative, on
!, 1902. Mr.. Peysey contends.
the President was without authority to
appoint any persons to fill the positions
OF justices of the peace in this juris-
diction. The case. he stated is parallel
to that of the organization of the grand
and petit juries for the circuit and
criminal branches of the Supreme Court
OF the District for the month Of jan
uary last
The law under which the Jurors were
drawn and the juries organized was in
opera tive because it had not been signed
by the President before the summonses
for the talesmen were issued. When
the matter was called to the attention
Of the court, District Attorney Gould
made test case on the indictment
against William Clark, and the matter
was taken to the Court of Appeals for
The District.
There the question was argued on
either side by eminent counsel. and the
court held that the juries were Illegally
irawn and organized and the Indictment
gainst Clark was declared to be null
and void.