Show THE CASE fik IN mur COURT OUR T MUCH to t the he disappointment of the public the decision in the mandamus case ease was not given this efte afternoon raibon but was laid over until friday at 4 p ni the case is one of great im portative port atice not only to the people of utah but bilt to the cause of boman doman woman suffrage all over the union the limitation of the arguments meijun meiyun df counsel to one bno atu ebur r on either side gave no fair fali opportunity for ent entering into the jhb real merits of the ease case there was wa scarcely sard sarc ely time for a full argument on the demurrer both points of which appear to us to be very bell beil well pelf taken we hae already shown in our article of last evening that the supreme Sti sui preme court CO urt has h as no J jurisdiction in cases af manahi mandal mandamus lilus to an officer it belongs to brI original gInal jurisdiction and that is vested in the district courtland Court sand not the supreme court of this territory te that there was not sufficient cause for action named in the petition nor the writ aritis wr itis is also pla pia piam 1 in to any dna one of understanding who examines them and this his t was presented by counsel cou nisel nisei forsbe for atie defendants defend anas anns fully and aud forcibly lelh as the time admitted the arguments of if counsel for fon the thi e pet petition er vere sophistical and aud some of their statements incorrect intorre at for instance the affirmation that trat the tam woman in suffrage act does not require women women vot ers to be 21 years ofa of age e the defect if it W one that the law vf 1870 does not require women voters tow resident q of odthe orthe the precinct is cured by the registration law which does make that require men mun tand the registrar who is now called in question guestion acts under theatter law which creates his big office and defines ins las duties A mandamus is I 1 frfd the purpose of compelling an officer to perform ome some duty du t which be has neglected but in this case there theeb is no neglect or nonperformance of duty the offic officer etts etIs is called in question for lor riot doing something which would be W a aviola violation of law ori the demand of a p private private individual who swears he bd is a taxpayer while his name does doeg not appear on cin th the e assessors roll or olf course we have no means of knowing 11 V the decision is likely to be but cannot camlot t think that it will be in fir the thib ejiu nature r i v of a setti eme nt of the val eal the woman suffrage act which would be the practical disfranchisement of several thousands of women women voters after exercising er the right for more tha than n a decade a deprivation of their vested rights without opportunity port unity of defending their position in a court of law before saying any thing further r on the bearings of this thia important case we wait the decision of the su preme court on the mandamus nuis nils question |