Show ANOTHER JUDICIAL TWIST thic THE decision ot of the supreme court of the territory in the cases of the auditor and treasurer denying an appeal to the supreme court of the united states appeared in wednesday evenings DESERET NEWS we have no comments to make on any part of it except the last paragraph but one the vital point in the application for an appeal p e al is there referred to to but in a casual and indifferent manner it is in regard to the authority exercised by the late governor in the appointments point ments menis of auditor and treasurer it cannot be disputed that this was an authority exercised under the united stated Stat ca we ive presume no one will question that the act of congress under which the appeal is claimed provides for an appeal when an authority exercised under the united states is drawn in question was that authority drawn in question in the cases cased before the court if we concede everything that the court declares except that thai therein lies the gist of the whole question of the right of appeal and point was presented to the court bp attorney F ti richards and afterwards argued by judge sutherland the court say the action of the governor cannot bo be properly criticized toy the defendants W while itile this court expressed its opinion which it now reaffirms that tile the governor was authorized to do what he did do we were not required to pass upon that question in disposing of the appeal ot ol the defendants this is an ingenious but not very creditable way of getting around the point in ia the question at issue when the suit was planted la in the district court it was not only to oust the incumbents but to inseal the Gover governors norla appointees but when tile the defendants by counsel commenced to argue against toe lae right of the governor to exercise thu the authority to appoint the court ruled that they had bad no right to do so they must simply show their right 11 to hold tile the offices af after ter stopping argument on tae question the courtin court in addition to deciding against the defendants fun fend dauts ants declared itte the right of the claimants to the offices under the governors appointment from this decision the defendants appealed sow now it must te oe understood that the appeal was irom from the whole judgment it was not merely against that part of the decision as to the ouster but included the ruling as to the installation of tile the claimants the appeal was to test both questions in the former the validity of tre tae action of the legislature under the organic act was in question in the latter the exercise of an authority under the united states was in question the court answers and settles the arguments as to the first point but ignores and refuses to notice the areu arau mento meats as to the last point which is one on which an appeal can be taken under the congressional statute to the supreme court of the united states yet the court affirms the decision of the he lower court on both questions and when denying the appeal based on the latter question on the ground that it is not an issue before the jy reaffirms its decision anthe on the of that question if this is not the I 1 most ost miserable kind of pettifogging what is the proper word to use in regard to it no one who understands tue situation can fail to think that it is a wretched shift a tricky expedient to prevent it possible the review of the question by the highest court of the cou country etry thattie that the whole case turned on the right of the governor to appoint instead of the people to elect the auditor and treasurer cannot be fairby disputed and thattie that the court has taken a twist to hinder the adjudication of this question as provided for by the law of the land is patent to every one who is not blinded with the dust oi of the latest local judicial deoris decision lou |