State Ex Rel. Mitchell v. Alley

35 S.E. 231, 126 N.C. 84, 1900 N.C. LEXIS 191
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedFebruary 27, 1900
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 35 S.E. 231 (State Ex Rel. Mitchell v. Alley) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of North Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State Ex Rel. Mitchell v. Alley, 35 S.E. 231, 126 N.C. 84, 1900 N.C. LEXIS 191 (N.C. 1900).

Opinion

*85 Clark, J.

Sec. 4, chap. 157, Laws 1895, provided tbat there should be elected “in each township in the State three Justices of the Peace, and, for each township in which any city or incorporated town is situated, one Justice of the Peace for every .1,000 inhabitants in such town or city.” By a provision in see. 20, chap. 159, Laws 1895, (which is continued in sec. 29, chap. 507, Laws 1899), “if any ticket shad contain the names of more persons than such elector has a right to vote for, such ticket shall not be numbered in taking the ballots, but shall be void.” The answer admits the allegation in the complaint that the names of all four defendants were printed on all the ballots cast and counted for them as Justices of the Peace, at the' election held in Franklinton Township on the 8th of November, 1898. The exceptions to evidence are without merit, and require no discussion.

The jury found upon the issues submitted to them that on the ballots cast for the plaintiffs there were only their three names, and that Franklinton (the only incorporated town in that township), had less than one thousand inhabitants at the time of the election. It follows that the tickets cast for the four defendants were void, and that the plaintiffs were legally elected.

This result is not consonant to natural justice, which would seem to require that when, four persons are, doubtless bona fide, voted for on .a ticket which should contain only three names, some method should be provided for the selection of three out of the four, if that ticket receives the highest number of votes. But the provision of the law is explicit. The judgment below is

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Bray v. . Baxter
86 S.E. 163 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1915)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
35 S.E. 231, 126 N.C. 84, 1900 N.C. LEXIS 191, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-mitchell-v-alley-nc-1900.