Thomas v. State Board of Elections

124 S.E.2d 164, 256 N.C. 401, 1962 N.C. LEXIS 472
CourtSupreme Court of North Carolina
DecidedFebruary 28, 1962
Docket452
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 124 S.E.2d 164 (Thomas v. State Board of Elections) 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
Thomas v. State Board of Elections, 124 S.E.2d 164, 256 N.C. 401, 1962 N.C. LEXIS 472 (N.C. 1962).

Opinion

Denny, J.

The question presented for determination arises out of the following factual situation: The Honorable H. Cloyd Philpott was *403 elected Lieutenant-Governor of this State for a term of four years in the general election in November 1960, and took the oath of office and entered upon the duties of the office in January 1961. He died on 19 August 1961.

As a matter of history, the Honorable Tod R. Caldwell was elected Governor and the Honorable Curtis H. Brogden was elected Lieutenant-Governor of North Carolina for four-year terms in 1872. Governor Caldwell died on 11 July 1874. Lieutenant-Governor Brogden took the oath of office as Governor on 14 July 1874. See Governor’s Message to the General Assembly, reported in the Journal of the House, Session 1874-75, begininng on page 21.

It might be well to note that the succession of Lieutenant-Governor Brogden to the office of Governor is the only instance in the history of this State since the office of Lieutenant-Governor was created by the Constitutional Convention of 1868, when the Lieutenant-Governor succeeded to the Governorship before the midterm general election. In each other instance in which a Lieutenant-Governor has succeeded to the Governorship in this State, the vacancy in the office of Governor occurred after the midterm general election had been held. However, Governor Caldwell having died on 11 July 1874, less than thirty days prior to the next general election held on 6 August 1874, the question now before this Court has never been, nor could it have been, raised until the death of Lieutenant-Governor Philpott.

Therefore, the determinative question presented on this appeal is simply this: Is the succession of Governor and Lieutenant-Governor fixed by our Constitution, thereby excluding the right to have the vacancy in the office of Lieutenant-Governor filled by election prior to November 1964?

In considering the question presented, it is well to keep in mind that the offices of Governor and Lieutenant-Governor, aside from the powers and duties, are treated in the same constitutional manner. For example: The offices of the Executive Department of the State government were established and the terms fixed by the provisions of Article III, Section 1 of the Constitution of North Carolina, which reads as follows: “OFFICERS OF THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT; TERMS OF OFFICE. — The executive department shall consist of a Governor, in whom shall be vested the supreme executive power of the State; a Lieutenant-Governor, a Secretary of State, an Auditor, a Treasurer, a Superintendent of Public Instruction, an Attorney General, a Commissioner of Agriculture, a Commissioner of Labor, and a Commissioner of Insurance, who shall be elected for a term of four years by the qualified electors of the State, at the same time and places and in the same manner as members of the General Assembly *404 are elected. Their term of office shall commence on the first day of January next after their election, and continue until their successors are elected and qualified: Provided, that the officers first elected shall assume the duties of their office ten days after the approval of this Constitution by the Congress of the United States, and shall hold their offices four years from and after the first day of January.”

The eligibility requirements of the Governor and Lieutenant-Governor are set out in the Constitution and are the same. Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution is as follows: “QUALIFICATIONS OF GOVERNOR AND LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR. — No person shall be eligible as Governor or Lieutenant-Governor unless he shall have attained the age of thirty years, shall have been a citizen of the United States five years, and shall have been a resident of this State for two years next before the election; nor shall the person elected to either of these two offices be eligible to the same office more than four years in any term of eight years, unless the office shall have been cast upon him as Lieutenant-Governor or President of the Senate.” (Emphasis added)

There is certainly no denial of the fact that when the office of Governor becomes vacant, there is a constitutional plan of succession other than by an election, to fill the vacancy for the unexpired term. It is necessary, therefore, to examine the several sections of the Constitution bearing on the duties of the Lieutenant-Governor and the procedure to be followed when the “powers, duties and emoluments of the office of Governor shall devolve” upon the Lieutenant-Governor and he is unable to act.

Article III, Section 11 prescribes the duties of the Lieutenant-Governor as follows: “DUTIES OF THE LIEUTENANT-GOVERNOR. — The Lieutenant-Governor shall be President of the Senate but shall have no vote unless the Senate be equally divided. He shall receive such compensation as shall be fixed by the General Assembly.”

Article III of the Constitution deals with the Executive Department of our State government. The Lieutenant-Governor is an officer of the Executive Department. Even so, Article II of our Constitution which deals with the Legislative Department of the government, in Section 19, provides as follows: “PRESIDENT OF THE SENATE. — The Lieutenant-Governor shall preside in the Senate, but shall have no vote unless it may be equally divided.” Article II further contains the following provisions in Section 20: “OTHER SENATORIAL OFFICERS. — The Senate shall choose its other officers and also a speaker (pro tempore) in the absence of the Lieutenant-Governor, or when he shall exercise the office of Governor.”

The constitutional method of succession is set out in Article III, *405 Section 12 of our Constitution which reads as follows: “IN CASE OE IMPEACHMENT OF GOVERNOR, OR VACANCY CAUSED BY DEATH OR RESIGNATION. — In case of the impeachment of the Governor, his failure to qualify, his absence from the State, his inability to discharge the duties of his office, or, in case the office of Governor shall in anywise become vacant, the powers, duties and emoluments of the office shall devolve upon the Lieutenant-Governor until the disabilities shall cease or a new Governor shall be elected and qualified. In every case in which the Lieutenant-Governor shall be unable to preside over the Senate, the senators shall elect one of their own number president of their body; and the powers, duties and emoluments of the office of Governor shall devolve upon him whenever the Lieutenant-Governor shall, for any reason, be prevented from discharging the duties of such office as above provided, and he shall continue as acting Governor until the disabilities be removed, or a new Governor or Lieutenant-Governor shall be elected and qualified. Whenever, during the recess of the General Assembly, it shall become necessary for the President of the Senate to administer the government, the Secretary of State shall convene the Senate, that they may elect such president.”

We think the provisions of our Constitution clearly point out upon whom the powers, duties and emoluments of the offices of Governor and Lieutenant-Governor shall devolve in the event of a vacancy in either or both of said offices. We think this view is further supported by the provisions of Section 13 of Article III in our Constitution which reads as follows: “DUTIES OF OTHER EXECUTIVE OFFICERS.

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

Related

State Ex Rel. Martin v. Melott
359 S.E.2d 783 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1987)
Hogan Ex Rel. Murphy v. Turland
428 S.W.2d 316 (Texas Supreme Court, 1968)
Snow v. North Carolina Board of Architecture
160 S.E.2d 719 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1968)
Moody v. Transylvania County
156 S.E.2d 716 (Supreme Court of North Carolina, 1967)
Mayer v. D'ORTONA
184 A.2d 582 (Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, 1962)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
124 S.E.2d 164, 256 N.C. 401, 1962 N.C. LEXIS 472, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomas-v-state-board-of-elections-nc-1962.