Show THE MANDAMUS CASE As stated in our im impression of monday everli evening ng lack ot of space prevented our giving a more extended report bf the arguments in this case suffice it f to 0 say however that mr brown in a speech occupying nearly two hours in delivery ably and exhaustively argued th the it question esti estl onon on behalf of the people he took up rp the points of or the demurrer betia seria seriatim the following being a brief resumed resume of his arg arguments ment to the first point n in the demurrer that it ti does not t appear epli pear that at the time of issula issuing writ of mandamus murray was absent aglen t or that thomas was acting governor mr brown contended V 1 that it did appear that murray left this city january 1681 1881 and that therefore thomas as secretary became acting governor that as he became so on the ath the presumption of law was that that status of affairs continued until the contrary was shown that 2 as judge sutherland had said othe the courts take judicial notice who is governor so they also take judicial notice who is acting governor em r thomas is and was such when when the writ issued and the court must judicially notice and 3 that the title designated thomas as acting governor which was a sufficient allegation the second ground in the demurrer stated that the suit should be in the name dame of george Q cannon and not in the name of the people in ye lation relation of george Q cannon af mr r browns browni answer to this was 1 that the title was so put t in conformity to old iisak usage and law W that 2 it was a matter of indifference er being merely a nominal matter anyway that aj 3 the practice was aa as frequently to entitle in that way aa as any other that 4 it was amendable see 68 practice act that 5 the statute prescribed that defects in title should not annul statutes sec see if p and that 6 the suit was such that it is in behalf of all the people all of whom have equal nights righta in seeing the person who secures the greatest number of votes declared elected not only those who composed the but hut the whole population of nir dir mr bir brown cited a large number of cases eases in support of the above propositions sit ions the next point of demurrer was that the act enjoined upon the governor by sec 1862 comp laws US is political discretionary pr judi judicial claU ciau mr air Brown denied this and contended that the act like that ot of any other returning board or of officer was ministerial cited numerous cases in in support of this contention in reference to argument that mandamus cannot be issued to command action by the Governor 11 that all his duties are necessarily political that he be is king etc 11 mr air brown replied that 1 whatever whatever conflict of authority may exist on this subject itis it is settled in this territory by the adoption of the california code zode where it had been settled by decision before such adoption that a governor could be coerced in his ministerial duties by mandamus cases gases cases dases cited that athe governor of utah is not a supreme executive independent but Is the mere appointee of the president he is like a ahead head of one of the departments the supreme court had held in several cases that such an officer can be compelled by mandamus to perform his hig duties cited in reply to mr air van ziles contention that there is another adequate remedy and that the writ is discretionary mr browa maintained that there is na other adequate remedy to obtain the certificate and that the writ is not discretionary with the court mr van zile followed with the concluding argument he went over much of the same ground as that covered by judge sutherland directing his argument chiefly to the question as to whether or not mandamus would lie a ai asked for against the governor he maintained it could not arguing that the duties of a governor were entirely independent of the judiciary for i these reasons therefore they asked that the writ be denied this closed the arguments in the case his honor said that some of the authorities quoted were very important PO and he wanted to satisfy himself upon them to do that lie he would require a little time to look into the matter and would therefore tako take the case caso under advisement until wednesday morning at 10 by which winch time lie he would perhaps be able to give a decision wednesday 10 a m at the opening of the court this morning judge twiss said that in relation to the case of the people vs acting governor thomas he regretted to say lie he was not fully prepared to render his opinion in the matter this momin mornin gand gand gaud if it was no inconvenience veni ven lence ence to the counsel in the case he would like to defer giving his opinion until friday morning at 10 if lf however this would be inconvenient to counsel he would then deliver his opinion tomorrow to morrow thursday at two mr air sutherland so far as we are concerned your honor can have all the time required mr dir brown the matter is of great importance to us your honor and that being the case I 1 would prefer that the opinion be delivered tomorrow at 2 judge twiss all right i will tender my opinion to afternoon at 2 |