Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1919-02-13

that, sometimes fine q case in some
state in the Union which almost ex-
netly resembles the one you want. but
rarely in the history Of any juris-
prudence can a man hunt over the
books or look up decisions and find a
decision upon the very identical case
that he is trying. But here in this case
We have a decision of Justice Morrill,.
sitting as a single justice. upon the very
identical case. concerning the very iden-
tic al men. that this committee of the
Legislature is trying.
Now this case does not bear the
great dignity and responsibility that
Il case decided by the full bench
would bear, and still on this particu-
lar case this is the law up to this
time, and ] want to say not only
to the members Of the Senate but TO
the members Of that honorable COM
m;ttee, that they ought to go by the
law that we have now. They want
to do the fair thing. There is no
doubt about it. And we want to 40
the fair thing. We want IT, deal gu.
even handed justice and do what is
right between Edward II. Parent ana
Henry L. Irish. But supposinS this:
After we accept the report of this
committee. that Edward r. Parent j,
not elected and Henry l.. Irish is, and
this opinion Of Judge Morrill's goes
before the supreme court of the
State of Maine and they sustain
Judge Morrill,, not only does all our
fairness and justice vanish into thin
air, but every lawyer and every man
in the Senate is going to look -lbSo-
lutcly foolish. That. gentlemen. is
an argument that you cannot set
away from. 1t is true that that de-
cision has not been rendered vet. nut
so far rs we are. there is Judge
Morrill's opinion: and desire 10
state to you that it is my opinion
that that opinion of Judge Mor;:il
will be sustained by the full bench
and if it is do we want to put in her,
Il decision in the middle overruiinS
the opinion that Judge Morrill, has
made"
Now to pursue this opinion. In
the beginning Judge Morrill, states
upon the election cases which he
heard, and it will be necessary for
me to read some of this, and in this
particular reading of legal phrases
bear in mind that the petitioner is
Henry L. Irish and the defendant is
Edward r. Parent. Upon each pc
titioner falls the burden of showing
that he was elected to the office
which he claims. Before the court
can enter judgment in his favor it
must appear that the petitioner has
been elected and is entitled by law
to the Office claimed by him. 1t is
not sufficient to show that the in
cumbent was not elected; the pcti-
TONER must show that he himself was
elected and is entitled by law to the
office. Benner VS.. ~Payson, 40 Maine,
POI ,2O7:' Libby VS.. English, ITO Maine,
-tl9, 459: Murray VS.. Waite. 113 Maine,
49,, 492. Prior to the enactment of
the statute upon which these pro-
ceedings are based, the only exist
ing process by which the rights of
one unlawfully holding an Office
could be inquired into. was by quo
warranto. This writ issues in be-
half of the State against one who
claims or usurpS an Office to which
he is not entitled. to inquire by what
authority he supports his claim or
sllstaines his right. The proceeding
is instituted by the attorney general
on his own motion or at the rela-
ton of any person. but on his Off
cial responsibility"
Now to skip Il little bit in quotation
from the decision and beginning fur
ther down, it says: The form of
procedure is new, but the position of
the petitioners and the rules of evil
deace are the same. In quo war;
.aato the burden is upon the re-