Bridges v. ShaLLCross. Wm. L. Bridges

Decision Date19 July 1873
Citation6 W.Va. 562
PartiesBridges v. Shallcross. Wm. L. Bridges, Plaintiff, against Thomas P.. Shallcross, Defendant.
CourtWest Virginia Supreme Court
Syllabus.

1. The act passed by the legislature of West Virginia on the 14th day of January 1873, entitled "An act amending and re-enacting sec. one of Chap. 56 of the Code of West Virginia, concerning the Board of Public Works," is not repugnant to the 4th section of article the 7th of the constitution of the State of West Virginia. And the part or parts of the act of the legislature passed on the 1st day of April 1873, entitled "An act to amend and re-enact see's two, six, seven, fourteen and nineteen of Chap. 163, of the Code of West Virginia, which are directly involved in or apply to this case, is and are not repugnant to said 4th section of said article 7 of the constitution of the State of West Virginia.

2. The said act of the legislature of the 14th day of January 1873 does not in fact, or effect, operate an appointment of the gov_ ernor, and the other executive officers therein referred to, to a different office or to different offices, but substantially prescribes the duties and powers of the governor and said other executive officers, to be by them exercised and performed as constitutional officers of the executive department of the government to which they were or may be elected. In other words, said act in substance and effect simply annexed to the offices of governor, and the other executive offices therein named, powers and duties.

3. Prescribing the "manner" in which public officers shall be elected and removed, as expressed in the 8th section of art. 4 of the constitution of the State of "West Virginia, when read and considered in connection with article 7, see's 1 and 8, and sec. 40 of article 6 and other sections of the same constitution, includes the agent or person who may appoint, as well as the formality with which it should be done.

4. The said act of the legislature of the State of West Virginia passed on the said 14th day of January, entitled, "An act amending, and re-enacting sec. one of Ghap. 56 of the Code of west Virginia concerning the Board of Public Works" and en_ acting that said section be amended, and re-enacted so as to read as follows: "1. The governor, auditor, treasurer, superintendent of free schools, and attorney general, shall be and continue a corporation under the style of the "Board of Public Works;" is not repugnant to the constitution of said State, but is valid, and binding.

5. So much of the act passed by the legislature of the State of West Virginia on the first day of April 1873, entitled "An act to amend and re-enact see's two, six, seven, fourteen, and nineteen, of Chap. 3 63 of the Code of West Virginia" as is directly involved in and applies to this case; especialtythe part and parts thereof by which it is enacted that the Board of Public Works shall on the 15th day of April in the year 1873, and every two years thereafter, appoint a superintendent of the penitentiary at Moundsville, whose term of service shall begin on the first day of May next after his appoint, ment, and who should have the powers, and perform the duties of said office prescribed by law, and shall receive as an annual salary not to exceed $1500, at the discretion of the Board of Public Works' is not and are not repugnant to the constitution of the State of West Virginia, but is and arc valid and binding.

On the 4th clay of June 1873, William L. Bridges filed in the Supreme Court of Appeals a petition in which it was represented that on the 15th day of April 1873, at a meeting of the Board of Public Works, the said Board, pursuant to the provisions of an act of the legislature passed April 1st 1873 entitled "An act to amend and re-enact sec.'s six, seven, fourteen and nineteen of Chapter one hundred and sixty-three of the Co e of West Virginia," did on the said 15th day of April 1873, appoint the petitioner to the office of superintendent of the penitentiary at Moundsville, for the term of two years, to begin on the 1st day of May 1873, and fixed the salary of the petitioner as such superintendent at fifteen hundred dollars per annum; that on the 28th day of April 1873, the petitioner presented to the said Board of Public Works, then in session, his official bond duly executed with security, in the penalty of ten thousand dollars, conditioned according to law, which was then approved and accepted, and the petitioner then took and subscribed and filed with the said Board of Public Works the oath of office required by law.

The petition further represented that on the 1st day of May 1873, the petitioner went to the penitentiary at Moundsville to enter upon the discharge of his official duties, and then and there demanded of Thomas P. Shall-cross, who had been previously appointed superintendent of the said penitentiary under the laws in force at the time of such appointment, but whose term of office as such superintendent had expired and been determined by its own limitation and the appointment and qualification of the petitioner as his successor, to admit him to the office aforesaid, and to surrender to him the charge and custody of the said penitentiary and the convicts therein confined, and the property thereto belonging, and. to turn over to him the same, together with the books, papers, and all things thereto belonging; but the said Shallcross refused to recognize the rights of the petitioner in the premises, and hindered and prevented him from taking possession and charge of the said penitentiary, and continued in possession thereof, and refused to admit the petitioner thereto. The petitioner prayed that a writ of mandamus should be awarded, directed to the said Shallcross, commanding him to admit the petitioner to the said office of superintendent of the said penitentiary, and to surrender to him the possession and charge thereof, and to turn over to him all the property of every kind pertaining to the said office.

A mandamus nisi was awarded in accordance with the prayer of the petition, returnable June 18th 1873. On that day the defendant, Thomas P. Shallcross, filed the following return:

For return to the said mandamus, the defendant says that he has not admitted the said William L. Bridges to the office of superintendent of the penitentiary at Moundsville, or surrendered to him the custody and charge thereof, or of the prisoners confined therein, or the possession of the books, papers, or other property thereto appertaining; and for cause why he has not done the same, he now here shows to this Honorable Court:

That the legislature of this State on the 14th day of January 1873, passed an act entitled "An act amending and re-enacting section one of Chapter fifty-six, of the Code of West Virginia, concerning the Board of Public Works," thereby enacting that said section be amended and re-enacted so as to read as follows: "1. The governor, auditor, treasurer, superintendent of free schools and attorney general shall be and continue a corporation under the style of the "Board of Public Works;" and on the first day of April 1873, passed another act entitled " An act to amend and re-enact sections two, six, seven, fourteen and nineteen of Chapter one hundred and sixty-three of the Code of West Virginia," thereby enacting, among other things in the last mentioned act contained, that there shall be a board of directors of the penitentiary consisting of five persons, appointed by the Board of Public Works, on the fourth day of March, or as soon as practicable thereafter, and that they shall each be allowed as compensation for their services the sum to be fixed by the Board of Public Works, not to exceed three dollars for each day necessarily employed, and ten cents per mile for every mile necessarily travelled in going to and returning from the penitentiary, by the most direct route; and that vacancies in the board shall be filled as they occur by the Board of Public Works: Provided, that no two directors shall be residents of the same county, and, provided further, that one director shall reside in the county of Marshall; and also enacting thereby that the present board shall.continue in office until the fourth day of March 1873, and until their seccessors shall have qualified; and by the last mentioned act also enacting, among other things therein contained, that the Board of Public Works shall, on the fifteenth day of April, in the year 1873, and every two years thereafter, appoint a superintendent of the penitentiary at Moundsville, whose term of service shall begin on the first day of May next after his appointment, and who should have the powers and perform the duties of said office prescribed by law, and shall receive as an annual salary not to exceed fifteen hundred dollars, at the discretion of the Board of Public Works, and that the Board of Public Works may remove the superintendent, and said Board may fill any vacancy that may occur in the office of superintendent. All which, with other things, will more fully and at large appear by reference to said acts, to which the defendant here refers, and which he makes part of this his return as if here inserted. And the defendant now here further shows to this Honorable Court that the enactments above specified were and are repugnant to the constitution of this State, and of no effect in law. Nevertheless, the persons who on the 15th day of April 1873, were such auditor, treasurer, superintendent of free schools, and attorney general respectively, did, after the passage of said acts and by virtue thereof, and without any other authority or warrant therefor, assume to be and act as such Board of Public Works, and as such Board to appoint the said. William L. Bridges to the office of superintendent of the penitentiary at Moundsville, at the time and for the term in said mandamus specified. And the defendant further shows to this Honorable Court, that the said ...

To continue reading

Request your trial
79 cases
  • State Ex Rel Keith 0. Bumgardner v. Mills, (No. 10148)
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • 22 d2 Março d2 1949
    ...ex rel. James v. James, 73 W. Va. 753, 81 S. E. 550; Schmulbach, v. Speidel, 50 W. Va. 553, 40 S. E. 424, 55 L. R. A. 922; Bridges v. Shallcross, 6 W. Va. 562, Lewis v. Whittle, 77 Va. 415. Moreover, the question pre- sented in this proceeding does not primarily involve a dispute or a conte......
  • Southern Pac. Co. v. Bartine
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Nevada
    • 3 d3 Março d3 1909
    ...to declare invalid an act of the Legislature vesting in the Legislature itself the appointment of railroad commissioners. In Bridges v. Shallcross, 6 W.Va. 562, the of West Virginia had passed an act providing that the Governor, Auditor, Treasurer, Superintendent of Free Schools, and Attorn......
  • Board of Ed. of Wyoming County v. Board of Public Works
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • 23 d2 Junho d2 1959
    ...722, 42 S.E.2d 31; State v. Furr, 101 W.Va. 178, 132 S.E. 504; Ex parte McNeeley, 36 W.Va. 84, 14 S.E. 436, 15 L.R.A. 226; Bridges v. Shallcross, 6 W.Va. 562. In passing upon the validity of a statute which is challenged as violative of the Constitution of this State, every reasonable const......
  • State Ex Rel. Bumqardner v. Mills, 10148.
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • 22 d2 Março d2 1949
    ...also State ex rel. James v. James, 73 W.Va. 753, 81 S.E. 550; Schmulbach v. Speidel, 50 W.Va. 553, 40 S.E. 424, 55 L.R.A. 922; Bridges v. Shallcross, 6 W.Va. 562; Lewis v. Whittle, 77 Va. 415. Moreover, the question presented in this proceeding does not primarily involve a dispute or a cont......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT