Daily capital journal. (Salem, Oregon) 1903-1919, 1915-02-09
COUNTY JUDGES
CANNOT HOLD OVER
Supreme Court Holds That
Successful Candidates
Should Fill Office

Holding that the initiative law which
was adopted by the people at the gen,
eral election in 1910, did not take eff.
feet until it was proclaimed by the gov
ernor on December 3, 1910 and that it
was not retroactive but applies only to
officers elected subsequent to its adop.
tion the supreme court today held that
the county judges who were elected to
office at the general election in 1910
do not hold office for six years, as pro.
vided in the initiative measure and in
cases where an election was held for
the purpose of choosing a successor al
the last general election the successful
candidate is entitled to the office.
This opinion is handed down in the
case of J, y, PLY VS.. Ed Wright, coun.
ty clerk of Union county, in which the
applicant is granted a writ of mandam.
us for a certificate Of election which
operates TO oust County Judge j. c.
Henry from office who was holding on
under the contention that under the in.
itiative amendment of 1910 he was en-
titled TO hold the office until January
l, 1911 This opinion applies, however,
only to such cases in which an election
was held to select n successor to the
present incumbent and il does not cf-
feet the ease of County Judge n. j.
Cleeton, Of Multnomah county, in whose
case no election was held to choose
successor and Judge Cleeton is entitled
to hold his office until the next general
election.
The opinion is written by Justice
Eakin and Chief Justice Moore and
Justice Burnett dissent from the ma.
iority opinion Of the court. Justice
Burnett was the author of the opinion
in the case Of the state cx rel, VS.. Hol.
man, in which II was held that the in.
itiotive law went into effect upon thc
closing Of the polls on election day but
the dictum held in the present ease
conflicts with the views expressed in
the Holman case and IL is overruled
The question presented in the Ply VS.
Wright case was not involved in the
Holman case and il seems to have been
taken for granted that the amendment
went into effect upon the closing of tho
polls on election day, the same as would
have been the case with laws prcpared
by the initiative. The distinction made
by the constitution us between the
passage Of initiative laws and consti.
tutional amendments not having been
brought to the attention Of the court.
The distinction drawn between the
amendment TO article Z Of the state
constitution in 1910 and the initiative
law is that the former took effect on
the proclamation Of the result Of the
election by the governor, and that laws
enacted by the initiative takes effect
from and after the closing of the polls
on election day, but by virtue Of article
II Of the constitution in 1906 amend.
ments to the constitution do not take
effect until the reul is proclaimed by
the governor.
Vests Appointee Is ousted.
In another opinion, written by
Justice Benson, the supreme court this
morning also held that the legislature
has no authority TO legislate a consti.
tutionnl officer out Of office and held
that +, S, Ivanboe, who was acting "a
the duly elected and qualified district
attorney for Union aud Wallowa eoun.
ties when the act Of the Legislature Of
1913 went into effect, providing for the
appointment Of counties, was wrongful.
~ and illegally deprived Of his right to
hold office, until his successor was
elected and qualified by the appoint.
ment Of John $. Hodrin by former Gov.
ernor West and that he is dill entitled