of December following. The court met at Lecompton on the third day of December 1 85 5; present were Chief-Justice Lecompte, and Justices Elmore and Johnston. On the 4th, Jeremiah M. Burrell, of Pennsylvania, presented a commission from the President of the United States as an associate justice, dated the 13th of September, 1855, on which his oath of office was endorsed. On the next day Sterling G. Cato, of Alabama, presented a commission from the President of the United States, as associate justice of the same date as Mr. Burrell's. The follow ing entries appear upon the Journal : — "The Hon. Jeremiah M. Burrell and Sterling G. Cato, having presented commissions from the President of the United States, as associate justices of the court, each dated the 13th day of Septem ber, 1855, and the Hon. Sanders W. Johnston and Rush Elmore, heretofore associate justices of said court, denying the power of the President to issue such commissions, and claiming to be themselves entitled to occupy the position of associate jus tices, under and by virtue of their existing com missions, until the expiration of the term of four years, and until the appointment and qualification of their successors, being the period of their ap pointment; and the matter being thus presented for determination to the Chief-Justice, he, without deciding or professing to decide the question of the power of the President in this respect, stated it as his opinion, that he ought to be governed by the commissions of the President aforesaid, and that being so governed, he could but recognize these gentlemen, Jeremiah M. Burrell and Sterling G. Cato, as associate justices de facto, and, as such, entitled to occupy seats upon the bench. To which opinion and judgment of the Chief-Jus tice, the said Sanders W. Johnston and Rush El more except, and enter their most solemn protest, the entry whereof is made at their request. . . . Whereupon the said Jeremiah M. Burrell and Sterling G. Cato took their seats as associate jus tices." The court met again on the first day of December, 1856; and, during the term, on the 13th day of January, 1857, Hon. Thomas Cunningham presented a commission from the President, as an associate justice in place
of Jeremiah M. Burrell, dated 19th of No vember, 1856, and took his seat. It does not appear from Justice Cunningham's com mission, from what State he was appointed, but it is believed that he was a native of Pennsylvania. The 14th day of January, 1857, appears to be the first date at which any cases were called, but none were then argued. Two were dismissed for want of prosecution, and time was given in another for the assignment of errors. At the June term, 1859, Hon. John Pettit, of Indiana, having been commissioned Chief-Justice in place of Lecompte, by commission dated March 9, 1859, appeared and took his seat. There were no other changes of the territo rial government. The last record on the journal of any pro ceedings in the Supreme Court of the Terri tory, is dated Jan. 11, 1861, but is not signed. Kansas was admitted into the Union as a State, by act of Congress dated Jan. 29, 1 861. The territorial legislature was in ses sion at the time the act of admission was passed, and continued to transact business for several days afterward. The acts passed by this body, after the admission, were de clared to be valid by the Supreme Court of the State in the case of Hunt v. Meadows, 1 Kas. 90. The publication of the reports of the deci sions of the Supreme Court of the Territory, was commenced in 1860, by Hon. Thomas Means. There were forty-eight pages of the work printed at that time, and then it ap pears to have been abandoned. In 1870 James McCahon, of Leavenworth, Kansas, took up the work, and in one volume re ported all the cases of which any record could be found of the territorial Supreme Court decisions; amounting, in number, to twenty-eight. Among the cases cited, there is none of any importance, or involving questions of political significance, or that have any bear ing upon the thrilling events of those troub lous times. There is one case in the District Court of the First Judicial District of the
