The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1902-04-18

them to hold offices to which TREY may
nave Deen appointed by the judges of any
court OF record exclusively, and this Is
not forbidden by the charter inhibition.
unless the municipal court of this city
IS to be regarded as a city court and not
state court, a question upon which
most eminent lawyers differ.
1T further renders members of the
beard OF public works capable of election
to the common council and as members
of the board Of county commissioners
whereas, If it were not for this act q
member of the board of public works, il
elected to the common council, would va
cate his position in the board immedi-
ately he was ipducted into the incompati-
bic office.
Pins Faith on "Hereafter."
II am not inclined to the view as win
be evident from what 1 have already
stated, that, with our home rule charter
intervening, the act of 1901 can be said to
be such an amendment of the act of 1897.
at least so far as this city is concerned
that it relates back to the date of the
approval of that act and date from then.
Even II that view of it We're sound, it
seems to me that under the rule laid down
by Judge Sutherland in his work of
Statutory Construction at section 49,
and upon the authority of the case of
kerlinger V. Barnes, ii Mimi, 526, when
similar use Of the word hereafter in
an amendatory statute was considered
and those in which the court had since
approved that doctrine, its exceptions
anu PROVISIONS can nave dDDIlCaLlOl only
to any person hereafter elected
Michael POkes Fun at 1t.
Who started this investigation is mat
ter of conjecture though Mr.. Griggs
AYERS that it was reluctantly done at tie
request of Comptroller McCardy, who is
a steady patron of the ST. Paul legal de-
partment. He denies that there is politics
behind it.
THE old Murphy controversy revived
said Attorney J. c. Michael after read
ing Mr.. Griggs opinion last night sit
won't hold water. The motive behind thn
whole thing is too apparent TO go into
detail regarding the foundation on which
Mr.. Griggs bases his belief that Mr..
Murphy is Illegally holding Office would
be waste of time. To sum the whole
thing up there is nothing in Mr.. Griggs'
contention. When the act was passed uu-
der which Mr. Murphy was permitted 10
accept a seat on the board of public
works Mr.. Murphy submitted the law TO
me. He did this before accepting the OF
flee, and I gave him as my opinion that
the transfer was perfectly lawful. Since
reading this opinion [ am more than con-
WINGED that | was right 1t is the Boil
MCriarty case over again, and every body
knows how that resulted for those VINO
hoped to force Mr.. Moriarty from the Of
flee he was legally entitled to and elected
to- The only purpose of this thing IS
to ruin Mr., Murphy and revive the old
controversy. The assertion that the act
passed at the last legislature does not
apply to Mr.. Murphy, but will in the case
of those elected to any city or county
legislative body from now on IS lame
The very fundamental principles of law
reject some Of the points that Mr.. Griggs
attempts to show.
''RIIt why 9ttRmnt tO show the abs 1Yr-
dity of the whole thing" concluded Mr.
Michals 1T is inconsistent, it was done
for political effect and that is all there
is to it,
Murphy Is Not Worrying.
Mr.. Murphy does not take the attempt
to Gust him from office very seriously. T
guess he remarked last night, 'TH be
holding Office this time next year l know
they were trying to find some way to
give me trouble. Comptroller McCardy
paid me my salary yesterday and he said
nothing. He at least recognized me"
What will be the next act of those be-
hind the movement to have the Office
which Mr.. Murphy holds declared vacant
is not known unless It will be to bring
quo warranto proceedings, as was done
in the case of Bell against Aid. Mornarty.
The scheme, it is thought. is to have
Comptroller McCarty deny Mr.. Murphy
his salary when pay day arrives next
month and compel him to bring man
damus proceedings Then the court would
have to decide the point at issue.
Would Put Dix Out, Too.
In the opinion Assemblyman DIX, who
also combines with his position of repre-
sentative the rather lucrative office f
clerk Of the municipal court, is referred
to, but no reference is made to any ie-
gality that may exist in his case. Mr..
Griggs says it all rests on the question
whether the municipal court is a city Of
flee or one of record.
He was not asked to pass on this ques-
ton, he says, and he ignored It.
eff the opinion is CORRECT, as MIR. Griggs
contends that it is" said Mr.. Michael In
his conversation last night "then Mr..
Dix is as much an illegal official as Mr..
Murphy is. Perhaps doubly so, for Mr..
Dix never took the trouble to resign h s
office in the assembly when he was given
the clerkship."
Friends of Mr.. Dix, it is understood,
do not like the issue which has been
raised, no matter how ridiculous it is
Even, they says, that if the opinion is
correct Mr.. Dix is as much "out" as Mr.
Murphy, but they take little stock in the
whole thing.