|
|
|
tested. In regard to one particular of the bill, he said he
was happy to be able to relieve the minds of the com-
plainants, and that was as to their apprehension of being
appointed judges of election. He thought he could assure
them there was no danger of that, and he was quite will-
ing, so far as that went, to let the injunction go against
the board.
Orville Horwitz, Esq., is the counsel for Sheriff Thomp-
son.
On Monday, April 1, S. Teackle Wallis and Orville Hor-
witz, Esqs., counsel for respondents, appeared before
Judge Martin in the Superior Court. A. M. Rogers, Esq.,
counsel for complainants, also appeared.
After some conversation with Mr. Rogers, Judge Mar-
tin said to the counsel for the Police Board and the sheriff
that he had requested Mr. Rogers to put in his notes, and
that if he required any notes in reply he would advise
them. Otherwise he would decide the question without
delay, and it could be taken to the Court of Appeals.
Mr. Wallis said it was proper he should advise the court
that the defendants had filed answers to the bill, putting
the complainants to proof of the material facts on which
they individually claimed the right to invoke the court's
interference. Under the ruling of the Court of Appeals,
the question of granting an injunction must be determined
under the circumstances on bill and answer, and not on the
bill alone—and a case of that sort was not the subject of
immediate appeal, but must fro up in due course to the
October term of the Appellate Court.
Judge Martin said that of course the bill and answer
and proofs, if required, would have to be considered to--
gether, but that he had already carefully examined the
question himself, and the great preliminary inquiry which
was above all others, was as to the right of a Court of
Chancery t0 restrain the people from doing a great po-
litical act; from holding an election which the political de-
partment of the State government had provided should be
held in order to take the sense of the people as to a change
in their Constitution. That power, he said, was claimed
by the bill, and he would receive the notes of the com-
plainants' solicitor upon it, and consider them. If he re-
13
|
|
|
|
 |
