CONNECTICUT. 



237 



!.-fcndimt. in Morris r. Bulkeley filed 

 ::iirrcr attacking tin- jurisdiction of the 

 :ind tin- judge reserved all questions of 

 ..ilved in the ease for the Supreme Court, 

 nhmial heard arguments on NOT. 28 and 

 r\ed its decision. As the Kepub- 

 )i:i I hitherto shown anxiety to have tho 

 led liy tho courts, it Was scarcely 

 d tlr.tt they would raise the objection to 

 isdietion -et out in their demurrer. Ear- 

 tlu- Mar Marvin II. Satiger had brought 

 .if ,ji, irnrranto against. Treasurer Henry, 

 Hiid the ca.-c came up for a hearing in the Supe- 

 urt on Nov. 10. Judge Thayer continued 

 await the decision in Morris v. Bulkeley.* 

 e Stale Senate reassembled on Nov. 10, and 

 adjourned to Dec. 7, from which date 

 Burned to .Ian. 6, 1892. The House assem- 

 !i Nov. 11, and adjourned to Jan. 6, 1892. 

 ( tin- of the few duties of the General Assembly, 

 the performance of which was not prevented by 

 -pule between the two Houses, was the 

 I'leetionof a United States Senator. The Re- 

 publican aucus early in January unanimously 

 reiiominaU'd Senator 0. II. Platt, and at a joint 

 session of the General Assembly on Jan. 21 ho 

 elected by a vote of 141 to 134 for Carlos 

 French, the Democratic nominee. 



:;il Complications. Early in his term 

 the Democratic State Comptroller refused to 

 draw an order for the monthly salary of the 

 uor's private secretary, on the ground that, 

 v. BulKeley was illegally holding his office, 

 any person appointed by him as private secre- 

 tary should not be recognized as a legal State 

 official. Secretary Austin Brainard thereupon 

 brought a writ of mandamus late in March 

 Comptroller Staub, in the Superior 

 . to compel him to issue the order. The 

 defendant filed an answer on April 7, alleging, 

 among other things, that Gov. Bulkeley had no 

 title to the office held by him. On motion to 

 strike out this part of th'e answer, Judge Hall, 

 late in June, ruled that the validity of the Gov- 

 ernor's title was a collateral question, which 

 could not be passed upon in the present case. 

 On a trial of the case on its merits before Judge 

 Robinson of the same court, a decision was ren- 

 dered about Nov. 15 to the effect that, as the 

 plaintiff was de facto private secretary of a de 

 facto Governor, it was the duty of the Comp- 

 troller, as a purely ministerial officer, to draw 

 his order in payment of the salary, regardless of 

 the title under which the plaintiff held. An ap- 

 peal was taken to the State Supreme Court. For 

 the reason alleged in this case the Comptroller 

 also refused to draw orders for the salaries of 

 Treasurer Henry and other hold-over officials and 

 appointees of Gov. Bulkeley. 



<>n July 1 the period expired for which the 

 appropriations were made by the General As- 

 sembly of 1889. Comptroller Staub at once 

 sought the advice of counsel respecting his au- 

 thority to draw orders when no appropriation 



* The State Supreme Court did not render its decision In 

 Morris c. Bulkeley till Jan. o, 1892. It then found Morgan 

 >. Bulkeley to be Governor, both de facto and dtjurt. Hit 

 right to hold over till both houses of the General Assembly 

 RhouM unite in declaring the election of his successor WM af- 

 firmed. The questions in dispute between the two bonne* 

 reparrtinK 'be rlirht of the General Assembly to go behind the 

 returns were not considered. 



existed for their payment, and was instructed that 

 in such case he might legally draw orders for all 

 expenses necessary to maintain the essential 

 operations of the State government, tho-e opera- 

 tions being essential which the General Assembly 

 had by law commanded to be performed, as dis- 

 tinguished from those which it had merely au- 

 thorized or permitted. Treasurer Henry at first 

 refused to pay any orders except those drawn 

 against the unexpended balances of former ap- 

 propriations, but informed the holders of State 

 orders that the ./Etna Life Insurance Company 

 would cash them at their full value upon presen- 

 tation at its office, the company trusting to fu- 

 ture legislation for reimbursement. Early in 

 August, however, the Treasurer obtained legal 

 advice that he might pay orders issued for all 

 services authorized by the Constitution or by 

 any act of tho General Assembly, in the same 

 manner as if a special appropriation had been 

 made therefor, and that the distinction made by 

 the advisers of Comptroller Staub between acts 

 which the General Assembly had commanded 

 and those which it had authorized should not be 

 observed. Under this opinion, the Treasurer 

 was justified in paying nearly every order pre- 

 sented. But the Comptroller, under the advice 

 of his counsel, refused to draw orders for any 

 objects not strictly essential to the maintenance 

 of the government. Among others, he refused 

 to issue orders for the expenses of the encamp- 

 ment of the National Guard at Niantic, and 

 Paymaster Fenn brought a writ of mandamus to 

 compel the issue of such orders. The case had 

 not been tried at the end of the year. 



Under the State law the Comptroller and the 

 Treasurer are required to meet as a Board of 

 Equalization to examine and correct the returns 

 of insurance companies as to the value of their 

 capital stock, etc. When the time for meeting 

 came in October, Comptroller Staub, who had 

 never officially recognized Treasurer Henry, in- 

 vited the Democratic claimant, Marvin H. San- 

 ger, to meet with him and examine the returns. 

 Treasurer Henry did not assert his right to act 

 as one of the board, but declined to accept the 

 value placed by Messrs. Staub and Sanger upon 

 the insurance stock, or to recognize any of their 

 acts as legal. He announced his willingness to 

 receive checks from the insurance companies to 

 the amount of the value placed by the latter 

 upon their stock, and to credit them on account, 

 but would not accept such checks in full pay- 

 ment for taxes. 



Late in February Gov. Bulkeley issued a requi- 

 sition upon Gov. David B. Hill, of New York, 

 for the return of one Fardon, who was charged 

 with the crime of burglary. When the papers 

 were presented to Gov. Hill, on Feb. 24, he re- 

 fused to honor them, on the ground that he 

 could not recognize Gov. Bulkeley as the legal 

 Governor of Connecticut, believing that he was 

 a usurper, and that Judge Morris was entitled 

 to the office. On March 5 he refused another 

 requisition from Gov. Bulkeley for the return of 

 one Colbert, charged with horse stealing. 



Decision. In the suit of Fields vs. Osborne 

 the State Supreme Court, earlv in June, rendered 

 a decision that indirectly settled some of the dis- 

 puted questions involved in the contest over 

 State officers. The suit turned upon the validi- 



