Mott

delivered the opinion of the court as follows.

This case is brought here informally upon an agreed statement of facts, in substance as follows:—

The legislature at its last session having created the Tenth Judicial District, and not having appointed a Judge therefor, the Governor, on the 1st day of May last, issued a commission to the respondent, who was duly qualified, as required by law. That the relator, on the 10th day of October last, received a commission from the Governor as Judge of said district, having been elected by the people at the September general election, and was duly qualified by taking the constitutional oath of office. That the relator having appeared in court, the respondent then being on the bench, claimed the rightj to exercise the duties of Judge of the court. The court decided that he had not such right, and adjourned until the 3d Monday of October, for the purpose of ■ obtaining the decision of this court upon the right set up by the .relator.

The office of District Judge is usually termed a constitutional ■ office, as distinguished from those offices which are created by the ■ legislature. It is an office whose term is fixed by the Constitution, and…