Page 2

-sion does not confer the office, or the right to hold it upon the person commissioned. We only prima facie evidence of his having been elected to it, and that is the case even where there is no contest as to the matter. I maintain that if Mr Goode had never resigned (although it is misnomer to say he resigned, as he was never elected) but had claimed his seat, under his commission, the objection could be made, on terms, as it was done in the case of Mr Laspley?—who went on the bench under his appointment by Gov^r. Whitfield—by any party having a case in Court. Upon the resignation of Judge Sharkey, Mr [Laspley?] was appointed to fill the vacancy. Judge S term had more than one year to run. In such case the Governor has no power to appoint.

Again: There is no contest in this case. After learning that Hunt had an actual majority of the votes polled, Goode as I learn, declared he would not be a candidate at the special election.

Under all the circumstances, if I still had a doubt as to the commission being only voidable, I would be inclined to resolve the doubt by advising that a commission issue to Hunt.

I rec^d. a letter from Mr Gillespie stating that you were at some loss as to one or two points arising under the law bonds to be issued to take up the Treasury notes issued for military defense &—[?] as to the form of the bond prescribed—which is "N^o. The State of Mississippi will pay five hundred dollars, payable ten years after day"—I am asked whether you are authorized to change the word day into date. There is no necessity for such change. The terms are synonimous in law in such a case. Ten years after what day? Why the day of the date of the bond, which the law requires to be signed.