Case Name: THE STATE OF NEVADA ex rel. CHAS. E. LAUGHTON, LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, Relator, v. JEWETT W. ADAMS, GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent
Court: Supreme Court of Nevada
Jurisdiction: Nevada
Decision Date: 1886-10
Citations: 19 Nev. 370
Docket Number: No. 1246
Parties: THE STATE OF NEVADA ex rel. CHAS. E. LAUGHTON, LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, Relator, v. JEWETT W. ADAMS, GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent.
Judges: 
Reporter: Nevada Reports
Volume: 19
Pages: 370–371

Head Matter:
[No. 1246.]
THE STATE OF NEVADA ex rel. CHAS. E. LAUGHTON, LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, Relator, v. JEWETT W. ADAMS, GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, Respondent.
Mandamus — Bond of State Officer — When must bf Filed. — A petition for a mandamus to compel the governor to approve or disapprove the bond of an officer required by law to give a bond within thirty days from the time of his appointment must show that the bond was presented to the governor within the prescribed-time.
Appeal from the District -Court of the Second Judicial District, Ormsby County.
A. C. Ellis, J. R. Judge, and Wm. M. Stewart, for Appellant:
R. M. Clarice, for Respondent:

Opinion:
By the Court,
Belknap, C. J.:
The relator petitioned the district court to issue its alternative writ of mandamus requiring the respondent, the governor of the state, to take action, by way of approval or disapproval, of his bond as ex officio state librarian. By a law of the state approved February 17, 1883, and during the relator's term of office as lieutenant-governor, he was appointed ex officio state librarian. By a subsequent law, approved March 1, 1883, he was required, before entering upon the duties of the ex officio office, to execute a bond, with sureties to be approved by the governor, conditioned for the faithful discharge of the duties of the office. These facts, among others, are substantially set forth in his petition; and also the further fact that the bond upon which action was requested was presented to the governor upon the sixteenth day of November, 1885.
The district court sustained a demurrer to the petition, based upon the ground that the facts alleged were insufficient to entitle the relator to the writ. The ruling of the district court was correct. The law declaring the causes of vacancy in public offices provides, among other grounds, the refusal or neglect of the person appointed to give the bond required by law within thirty days from the time of his appointment. (Gen. Stat. 1657, 1670.) If the relator was entitled to have his bond approved, he should have shown, by proper averments, that it was presented to the governor within thirty days from the date of his appointment, or such other time as the statutes provide. Failing in this, the mandamus was properly refused.
Judgment affirmed.