Morning appeal. [volume] (Carson City, Nev.) 1877-1906, 1902-04-22


language from which such intention
could have been inferred. If the as
sumption of that absolute control ov-
er the purchase of supplies for this
Court exists in the Board of Capitol
Commissioners under the act creating
it, as claimed by the respondent, then
has the Legislature made. if it has
the power so to do, a coordinate and
Independent branch of the govern
ment of this State dependent in the
exercise and discharge of it's cOnsti-
,utional duties upon the will of a
Board consisting of members of an
other department of State govern
ment. Going still further, if such alb
solute control is given the Board as
claimed, then would the right of the
Court to hold its sessions necessary
for the administration of the law de-
pend upon the will of the Board of
capitol Commissioners. If this Board
has the absolute control, as claimed,
then by refusing the furnish the court
room with stove or other means of
heating could it Obstruct the court in
its jurisdiction during a greater part
of each year. BY refusing tables it
could prevent the Court making rec
ords required by law. To assume
that the Legislature did confer any
such absolute power upon the Board
is to assume that the Legislature pos
sesses unlimited power of legislation
in that matter-that it could by hostile
legislation destroy the judicial de-
partment of the government of this
State. In the absence of the statu-
tory authority given to the Cour by
Secion 2518, supra, there exists, as
We believe, the inherent power in the
Court, growing out of and necessary
to the exercise of it's constitutional
jurisdiction, to make the order. This
doctrine is not new but has been rec
ognized and acted upon by the Courts
of other States, and we have been I'm.
able to find any authority which holds
to the contrary.
In case decided by the Supreme
Court of the State of Indiana, dis
cusslng the power of q court to make
an order directing the Sheriff tt
take charge of and operate an ele
vator in the county building for the
convenience OF the court and litigant.
where there were stairways leading
to the floor upon which the court room
was situated, and where the Board O
County Commissioners having the
control of the county building hat
made an order contrary to the on,
made by the Court, the Court says
Courts are an integral part of thu
government and entirely independent
deriving their powers from the Con
sIitutiOn in so far as such powers art
not inherent in the very nature of tn,
judiciary. A court of general juris
diction, whether named in the Con
stitution or established in pursuanc,
of the provisions of the Constitution
cannot be directed, or controlled o.
iInpeded in its functions by any of thu
other departments of the government
The security OF human rights ana thu
safety Of free institutions require tn,
absolute integrity and freedom of &C
ton Of courts. Even with
out statutory enactment, however
the Court, as we have seen, pOssesse
all the powers necessary for the fire.
and untrammeled exercise of its funC
tons"
Bird. of Comrs. v. Stout, 1876 Ind
3d.
The same court in another case us
es the following language: The pow
er of courts to order necessary re
pairs to the court room is inheren
and incidental to jurisdiction like tn
power to punish for contempt"
Bird. of Connors. v. Given, 1876 Int
562.
The Supreme Court Of the State
Wisconsin, in discussing the pOwe
OF the Superintendent Of the Capit'
: Building to appoint it's janitor unde
l the terms of an act similar in charac
: er to the act creating the Board
: Capitol Commissioners, supra, use
: this language: 1T is power inhe
+ ent in every court of record and e
: pecially one of last resort, to appoil
e necessary assistants charged with Il
t care of it's rooms and other like fu
f ctions; and the court itself is to jud.
t of the necessity; and it is doubt
whether the court could be deprive
d of this power by an act of the Leg
e latura'
D. In Re. Janitor of Supreme Cou
r. 35 Wis. 40.
20 See also 22nd L. r. A., 1913, cOntai