The Washington times., 1902-07-11
Authority of Charles S.
Bundy to Sit in Judg-
ment Questioned.
ORDERED TO SHOW CAUSE
Power of Justices 10 Issue Attachments
Also Questioned in Second Suit
Questions to Be Decided by the ST.
preme Court of the District.

preme Court of the District.
Chief Justice Bingham, of the Supreme
Court of the District, yesterday issued
an order requiring Charles 5. Bundy
to show cause on Wednesday next why
q writ of certiorari should not issue
against him to compel him to state by
what authority he exercises the powers
and duties of justice Of the peace in
this jurisdiction.
The rule was issued on the motion of
Attorneys Julius l. Peyser and R.
Meyer, counsel for Mr.. Simon y. Meyer,
who yesterday filed a petition asking
that a writ of certiorari issue against
Justice of the Peace Bundy, requiring
him to certify copies of the papers in
certain proceedings in which the petit
tioner is defendant to the clerk Of the
Supreme Court of the District.
A Most Important Question.
Chief Justice Bingham stated when
the petition was presented to him that
the matter is a most important one.
and instead of ordering the writ to is
sue, signed an order requiring Mr.. Bundy
to show cause why the writ should not
be issued The rule issued is as follows:
Upon consideration of the petition
for writ of certiorari, filed herein on
the 10th day OF July, 1902. it is by the
court. this 10th day of July. A. D. 1902,
ordered, that the respondent, Charles S.
Bundy, appear herein on or before the
23d day of July, 1902, at 10 o'clock a. m.
and show cause, if any he hath, why the
prayer of the petitioner should not be
granted, provided that a copy of this
order be served on the respondent on or
before the 2Sd day of July, 1902"
The action is intended to test the va
lidity of the tenure OF the District JUS
tices of the peace.
The petition is for a writ of certiorari.
directed to Charles S Bundy. asking the
court TO direct Justice Bundy to certify
the records and proceedings in the case
of Henry A. Willard VS.. S. y. Meyer to
the Supreme Court of the District of Co.
lumbia, so that the petitioner may have
q trial in accordance with law.
An Ejectment Case:
The petitioner states that on the 1st
day of July, 1902, Justice Bundy caused
to issue summons for the petitioner TO
appear on July II, to answer the com
plant OF Henry A. Willard, and show
cause why the said Willard should not
have possession of premises 1411 Penn
sylvania Avenue northwest, and which
is now occupied by Mr.. Meyer as tenant
Mr.. Meyer alleges in his petition that
the justice had no right or authority in
law to issue said summons, rs his term
of office had expired. He asserts that
by an act of Congress, enacted on the Sd
day of March, a code of law was en-
acted and established for the District of
Columbia 10 go into operation on the 1st
day OF January, 1902 Before the said act
of Congress became operative the Presi-
dent, in December, 1901, contrary to
law and without authority" appointed
Justice Bundy and nine other justices of
the peace, which appointments were
confirmed by the Senate.
Has No Jurisdiction.
Mr. Meyer alleges that under these
conditions and under the condition tha.
On the S0th day Of June. 1902, an act
was passed to amend the code, Justice
Bundy had no Jurisdiction. for the rea-
son that the amendment 20 section of
the code Of laws repealed the original
section. which went into operation on
the Ist day Of January. 1902, and also
that amendments TO sections 3 and 90
and others. bearing upon the question
OF the jurisdiction Of the justices OF the
peace. were in force at the time the re-
spondent issued the writ.
Meyer further alleges that, even con-
ceding that Bundy had a right to his
Office up to June 90. 1902, by reason Of
the Presidents neglect to reappoint
him. he had no right, power. or author
ity in law to issue the writ as his term
Ct Office expired On that date, when the
amendments 10 the code were approved.
Mr.. Meyer claims that under section
Of the code, as amended. which reads.
There shall be six justices of the peace
who shall be appointed by the President
of the United States for term OF four
years, unless sooner removed as pro-
vided by law" Mr.. Bundy has no right
TO his Office.
Wants Trial by Jury.
Concluding his petition, Mr.. Meyer
says, that if Justice Bundy is allowed TO
try this case he will be deprived of his
right to a trial by jury. as section Z of
the code declares that Trial by jury
before a justice of the peace is hereby
abolished" de asks that the Supreme
Court grant him a jury trial.
Right to Issue Attachments.
The power Of a justice Of the peace IN
the District 10 issue an attachment be-
fore judgment was presented to the su
preme Court of the District yesterday in
connection with the suit of Tracy L. JEFF
fords against David NJ. Hart and Alex
ander Mohit.
The proceedings were begun before
Justice Of the Peace Lewis I. O'Neal by
The plaintiff 10 recover 1920 claimed to