The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1920-05-30
SUPREME COURT
ORDER RECEIVED
COMMISSIONERS MAY FILE APP
PLlcATIoN FOR NEW HEARING
BEFORE CASE is SETTLED.

The decision OF the supreme court
reversing the decision of the circuit
court in this city several weeks ago
has ben received by the attorneys for
the citizens committee, Sullivan &
Sullivan, in which the commissioners
demurrer filed to avoid holding the
election, was reversed. The demurrer
sustained by the circuit judge has
been thrown out by the higher court
and the city commissioners must show
cause why they would not hold the
election.
The original mandamus Is in effect
and the commissioners must either
order the election or show cause why
they could not. No hearing has been
set by Judge Campbell as the find
ings of the supreme court has not yet
been filed with the circuit court.
The commissioners may, through
City Attorney Jones and Attorney
Beard, who is associated with Mr..
Jones, file an application for rehearing
before the supreme court before the
matter is again referred to the circuit
court It will probably be several
months before the matter is finally
settled or the election is ordered.
The decision of the supreme court
follows:
The court has reversed the order
of the circuit court for Escambla
county in the case of the state of
Florida, ex rel, J. Heron D'Alemberte,
Dudley r. Saunders and William L.
Meyer, plaintiffs in error, VS.. Frank d.
Sanders, Frank r. Pou a nd George
Hinrichs, constituting the board OF
commissioners of the city OF Pensa-
cola, defendants in error The opinion
is by Judge Whitfield. Attorneys Sui
Ivan & Sullivan and E. c. Maxwell
Of Pensacola for plaintiffs in error;
John B. Jones and John S. Beard or
Pensacola for defendants in error. In
this case the circuit judge issued an
alternative writ Of mandamus COM
handing the city board of commission
ers to call a special election OF the
qualified voters of the city of Pensa-
cola, at which the following PROPOSE
ton shall be submitted Shall the
city of Pensacola abandon its organl-
cation under the provisions of law
providing commission form OF gov
eminent; land to take all necessary
steps for the holding of an election in
accordance with law, or to snow cause
for not doing so. A demurrer to the
alternative writ was sustained and the
writ dismissed. The relatives took writ
of error.
After reciting the provisions of the
constitution and the statutes appllca-
BILE to the case, the court says:
when chapter 6746, acts of 1919
was enacted, it in effect superseded
the operation of the former charter
acts of the city of Pensacola. Such
superseded charter acts were by Sec
ton 40, chapter 6746, acts of 1913, put
in allegiance and made subject to be
again called into operation by an cleo
ton under section 40, chapter 6746
acts of 1913, upon which contingency,
chapter 6746, acts of 1913, would itself
be superseded. Section 40 of chapter
6746, acts of 1913, under which the
election here desired is authorized does
not relate to amendments of the char
ter acts or to the adoption of a new
charter proposed by the municipal au-
thorities, and therefore was not re-
pealed or superseded by chapter 6940,
acts of 1915. The election here sought
to be called under section 40, chap
ter GAS, acts of 1913, is not to amend
the charter of the city of Pensacola,
but to again put into operation the
operation the particular charter pow
ers that had heretofore been in force
but were superseded by chapter 6746.
Under section 8, article VIII of the