| Show THE OGDEN COURT BILL an important and interesting legal question it will be remembered by our citizens that some months sinco R A pidcock made an assignment of his mercantile business to frank cook for th benefit of his creditors some ortho homo creditors being dissatisfied with this assignment attached and had the block sold and mr frank cook bad suit brought at salt lake city in the third district court against the sheriff the attaching creditors and tho purchaser notwithstanding all tho parties lived at ogden and the bill passed by the governor and legislative assembly had in the meantime been published putting and four other counties in the first judicial district and taking them out of the third and that the governor had issued bis proclamation fixing aden as the place for holding the court for said five counties under our laws suits may be brought any where in the territory against any party in or out of it but he defendant has the right to have the ruit changed to the proper county for trial on proper motion the defendants uede such motion by their attorneys richards fe william which the plaintiff by liis attorney sutherland me bride resisted on the idea that the enactment separating these five counties from the third district and putting them in the first district and the governors proclamation fixing the court at ogden were all invalid and of no effect the motion was elaborately and ably argued by judge mcbride for plaintiff and by judge williams for defendant judge in a very clear and strong manner backed up by numerous authorities showed that the formation of the districts and their alteration and modification from time to time had been con aided by congress to the governor and legislative assembly and that as to those the territorial assembly were omnipotent and that the mandatory part of ahel act transferring the cause were equally within their power and that this act was in harmony and not in conflict with section 20 of the practice act but if it were the past session had as much right to legislate on the subject as had the one that enacted the practice act and if there was a conflict the last act was the law he triumphantly showed that the authorities read md relied on by judge mcbride applied between courts of dif erent jurisdictions as to the subject matter and had no application to courts of the same jurisdiction of subject matter but in different localities cali ties as for instance he first second and third judicial districts for as to the over which the judges should preside and the rights of the defendant to have his suit tried in that district where he lived the statutory enactments were supreme the chief justice hunter hns kept the cise under advisement for some time but on monday he ruled that the motion was well made and the cause must be transferred to ogdan for thial judge mcbride had in a previous case assailed this same enactment on the idea that as governor emerys mor had been nominated a d Ut Mirt no emery had no right a governor to approve said act hence that it was void but he got so badly worsted in the argument that he did not present that but other objections to the validity of the statute in the cook case in which he fared no better the fiat has gone forth ogden Is the permanent seat of justice for these five counties and however unwelcome it may be to salt lake city attorneys and however it may take from them some rich fees it cannot now be helped and thoy bad better submit gracefully and die daiy gentlemen quit all this nonsense and let us ali go on rejoicing in the future seeing that there is room enough and glory enough and we hope business enough for us all |
