The Montgomery advertiser., 1904-09-05
Carmichael on Lusk Act.

Tn DTlei oral OplTlOh. Iohucicu cu
 Chancellor Jahn c. Carmichael held that there is no such act on the statute books as what is known as the Lusk act redistricting the judicial circuits
 of the State.
 This opinion was based upon an ex .
 animation of the journals of the House
 and Senate of the Alabama Legislature
 The journals show, he said, that the conference report did not recommend
 the passage of the bill, and the House,
 when 1t adopted that report. merely agreed that two amendments should be
 receded from by the Senate, and the
 journal fails to show that the House
 passed the bill after the adoption of
 the conference report.
 In other words. the Chancellor did
 not declare that the Lusk act was un-
 constitutional, but that there was no
 such act. The decision is unique in the
 history of Jurisprudence in Alabama.
 but Is conceded to be a logical deduc-
 tion.
 The opinion was rendered after a due
 consideration of the arguments made by counsel in the test case instituted
 by the bar committee. in which the Chancellor was asked to restrain the Board of Revenue from leasing a room for the additional judge of the Circuit Court of Jefferson County provided for by the Lusk act.
 The case will now be appealed to the Supreme Court, and 1t is believed that
 body will consider it at a special ses- sion to be held the latter part of this
 month or the first of October. and will render a decision in advance of the Mo- vember election.
 The Lusk act affects the entire juric iary system of the State. and for that reason the opinion of the Chancellor
 has been eagerly awaited throughout the State.
 After the announcement of the decis- ion, MT. Samuel l.. Weaver, who has
 been declared the nominee of the Dem .
 ocratic party for one of the judgeships
 of the Circuit Court of Jefferson Coun- ty, said to a newspaper man:
 q have refrained from saying any thing about our judicial muddle until the decision of Judge Carmichael. 1 There can be no doubt that his decision is but the expression of the unanimous opinion of all the lawyers of the State. It is true that sometimes the Supreme Court and the best lawyers have dif- fered as they did as to the constitu- tionality of the consolidated court bill for this county, and sometimes the lawyers in jest accuse that court of legislating a little occasionally. but the l most sceptical have never accused them of passing a bill that had not been in
 troduced and passed by both houses of
 the Legislature. Now this is the un- fortunate condition of what Is known as the Lusk redistricting bill
 "It is known that the Governor and many prominent Democrats of the State were bitterly opposed to the Lusk bill. That being the case, 1t would follow | that the acting Governor would be in | fiuenced thereby when 1t comes to call | ing an extra session of the Legislature, and the districting of the courts would fall back under the old law. In that event it would leave in this county two nominees for one circuit judgeship-- Judge A. A. Coleman and the under l signed-and 1t would then follow that | the party would have to make a second
 nomination. either by primary or con- vention, as to who should fill that of- | Ice. Now to avoid that contingency,
 would 1t not be a good suggestion for | my friends to seek the appointment
 Tor the unexpired term of Judge s. E. | Greene. In that case, if the Lusk bill | should be held constitutional, the ap- | pointment could be made by the Gov
 ernor to fill that office. I have had | enough of uncertainty. and the gentle
 men who did not go through the tolls 1 or a primary should take their chances | on the uncertain position. I want to ] thank the CountyEx Committee l TOT their kindness to me and the press
 or the city and county and the many l friendly expressions received from all | oVor the county"