Page 275 |
Previous | 275 of 416 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
Subset |
The Puffin Papers. 269
to Providence with an earnest prayer for prolonged life to such a man
as Joseph Caldwell, and that he may for a long time to come lose neither
the capacity nor the inclination nor the opportunity of fulfilling, where
he is, the high functions of his profession.
The mind revolts from the thought that this venerahle and ven-erated
apostle of science and virtue should in the natural life of his
frail body survive the child of his mental labors for thirty four years;
that he should now be compelled to abandon the scenes of his studies
and usefulness through such a long course of time, and seek another
abode, after witnessing the downfall and ruin of that institution which
has thus engaged his undivided attention, and from which he has shed
abroad through the land the lights of knowlege, of science, social duty,
public virtue, private probity, and Christian piety.
x
OPINION IN HOKE V. HENDERSON2
John D. Hoke v. Lawson Henderson.
A clerk appointed under the act of 1806 (Rev., ch. 693) has an estate
in his office, and although the Legislature may destroy the office and
by consequence the estate in it, yet the act of 1832 which continues
the office, but transfers the estate in it to another, is unconstitutional
and void.
On the last circuit, at Lincoln, before Norwood, J., the plaintiff pro-duced
a certificate of the sheriff of Lincoln, which set forth that an
election held in pursuance of Laws 1832, ch. 2, he, the plaintiff, had
been duly elected clerk of the Superior Court of Lincoln. The plain-tiff
then tendered the bonds required by the act, and moved that he
might be qualified and permitted to take upon himself the duties of
office. This was opposed by the defendant, who proved that he had been
appointed clerk of that court, in April, 1807, under the act of 1806
(Rev., ch. 693, sec. 10) ; that he had regularly qualified, and given bonds
for the faithful performance of the duties of his office, and that those
bonds had been renewed according to the several acts of Assembly re-quiring
such renewal. His honor disallowed the motion, because in
his opinion Laws 1832, ch. 2, was unconstitutional, and therefore null
and void, and in consequence did not affect the defendant's right to the
office. From this judgment the plaintiff appealed.
Iredell and Devereux for the Plaintiff.
Badger for the Defendant.
iThe following entry is taken from the minutes of the Trustees: The fore-going
memorial was read and approved of and ordered to be communicated
to the Legislature by tbe Presid ant of the Board.
2Prom 15 N. C. 1. This decision which was utterly at variance with those
of the Supreme Court of the United States and the courts of last resort in all
the other states was finally overruled in Mial v. Ellington, 134 N. C, 136.
Object Description
Description
Tags
Comments
Post a Comment for Page 275
