Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1907-03-22
NO RENT FOR The COVERNFR
Supreme Court Rules en- Question Involving
Use Of E1scutivs Mansisn.
NOT PtROUlsITE WITHIN LAW MEANING
Number of other Cases of Interest
over the state Decided by the
Supreme Court at Thurs
days sitting.
rFrom a star Corresnondent.l

CFrom a Stan Correspondent
LINCOLN, March 1.-(Special)-ln
lengthy opinion written by Judge Letton
and concurred in by the other members, the
supreme court has sustained the demurrer
flied by the attorneys OF Governor George
l.. Sheldon I'm the suit wherein the attorney
general. at the governors request, sought
to collect SlOO rent for the governors man
sion for January. The court holds that the
occupancy Of the executive mansion by the
governor, during the term OF office, is not
a perquisite Of Office or other compensation
as prohibited by the constitution.
On general principles the court says that
when the Legislature has construed pro-
vision Of the constitution in an admins
trative matter in one or two equally rea-
sonable ways It will not take the opposite
view, but will adopt and follow the legis-
l-lative construction. Judge Letten goes on
TO say that there is nothing In the con-
stltution which provides that the Legislature
shall furnish a state capitol building or
| that it shall furnish any office for the
executive. but there is no limitation on
| its power to do so and the creation Of
the office implies the power and the duty
to provide means, accessories and instru-
mentalities for the purpose of carrying
into effect the purpose for which the office
was created.
Had Right TO Buy II.
Judge Letton cites many instances in
which an official residence has been pro-
, vided for a state OF national executive
| and he commends the practice. He says
It cannot be questioned that the legislature
had the power to purchase the property
and provide for its occupancy by the gov
ernor. The only question was whether the
governor had the right 70 use 1t.
Judge Letton says;
We think the defendant Is no more liable
for rent Of the official residence than any
who is required for the proper conduct
| of his official duties, to reside in the in
stitution the supervision OF which is com com
mitted to his care or in which the service
he renders is required to be performed.
Hoon Case Affirmed.
In the case of the state against Ulysses
G. Hon. in which the defendant was
charged with the crime of desertion and
failure to support his family, the court
has affirmed the decision of the district
court of Lancaster county by which the
case against Hoon was dismissed.
The defendant abandoned his wife in 1900
but continued to support her until 1904
at which time he withdrew his support
As the present statute went into effect
April S. 1903, the court holds that he cannot
be convicted under It. Such conviction
would be retroactive. Both abandonment
and failure to support must occur since
the taking effect Of the statute. Both arr
essential elements of the crime.
Holt County Must Pay.
In the case of Rock county against Hol
county the court holds that the section o
the statutes providing for the care Of non
resident paupers by the county wherein
they are found and reimbursement there
for by the county OF such pauper's resi-
dence applies to all counties in the state
Holt county had contended I'm the lowe
court that the provisions of the statute di,
not apply to it because 1t had never estab
lished a poorhouse. The lower court rule,
that this contention was good, but the su
preme court did not agree with this view
In two cases arising in Box Butte county
/ in which ]. f. Moore coroner and Georg
d. Darling, an undertaken sued the count,
for the decent disposal of a body of an un
known man, the court holds that the count
must pay. Whether an inquest is necessar
upon the finding of a dead body is a mat
ter left very largely to the discretion o
the coroner and he will not be denied hi
compensation in the absence Of showing
that he has acted in bad faith. Because /
l may afterwards appear that an inques
: was unnecessary an undertaken who acte
( in pursuance to a direction of the corone
r. will not be denied reasonable compensa
? ton.
Emery Case Affirmed.
The conviction for contempt of cour
against George e. Emery of Gage county
with the attendant fine of $25 and costs
has been affirmed by the supreme court
Emery's contention in the supreme cour
was that the complaint or information wa
void because the charge contained there
was made upon Information and belief
only The record showed that County At
Z torney S. d. Killen has used the usua
manner of verifying criminal information
by stating that the charges were true a
'he verify believed" The court pays littl
: heed to this contention, ruling that the de
PENDANT waived it when he made no objec
r ton and filed an answer of not guilty. TIL
contempt Of which Emery was adjudge
guilty was an attempt to Influence tn
action OF a certain juror named Christia
I Miller. While leaving the court hOus
Miller was accosted by Emery and wa
conducted TO a saloon, where two glasse
, OF beer were ordered After becomin
+ quite friendly Emery is alleged to haV
I spoken of the case and to have said tina
/ some Of the parties would like to have
. verdict Miller told Emery to "cut It out
3 and then Emery replied that ne liked
s see a fellow that way" He also said
s is alleged, that he was going to see anothe
b Juror, too, but he was not going to sa
% anything to him. The court says tha
n these facts are sufficient to constitute cor
= tempt Of court,