Clements v. Powell
| Decision Date | 03 March 1923 |
| Docket Number | (No. 3144.) |
| Citation | 155 Ga. 278,116 S.E. 624 |
| Parties | CLEMENTS et al. v. POWELL, Tax Collector, et al. |
| Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
(Syllabus by the Court.)
[COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED]
Error from Superior Court, Lanier County; R. G. Dickerson, Judge.
Suit by H. W. Clements and others against Joseph. Powell, Tax Collector, and others. Judgment for defendants, and plaintiffs bring error. Affirmed with direction.
The petition was filed by H. W. Clements et al., alleging themselves to be of the county of Berrien and citizens and taxpayers on property within the county of Lanier, in behalf of themselves and of other citizens and taxpayers of the county of Lanier. Joseph Powell, alleged to be a citizen of the county of Lanier, and the duly and lawfully acting tax collector of said county, was made a defendant. The petition alleges in substance that on August 11, 1919, an act of the General Assembly was passed (Acts 1919, p. 45), proposing a constitutional amendment creating Lanier county, to be voted upon by the people. Section 5 is as follows:
"It shall be the duty of the Governor to submit said proposed amendment in the following form: That those voting in favor of said proposed amendment shall have written or printed on their ticket, 'In favor of the ratification of the amendment to paragraph 2, section 1, article 11, of the Constitution of the state of Georgia, creating the county of Lanier.'"
During the 1920 session of the General Assembly the aforesaid act of 1919 was amended to better define the lines of the new county, changing the territory proposed for the new county, and for other purposes. Although neither of the aforesaid acts contained a requirement that the Governor should submit the proposal to the qualified voters in such a way as to permit votes both for and against the amendment, in fact the Governor did submit the said proposal as follows:
"All persons voting in such election in favor of the adoption of the constitutional amendment creating the new county of Lanier shall have written or printed on their ballot 'For ratification, ' and all persons opposed to the adoption of the amendment creating the new county of Lanier shall have written or printed on their ballot 'Against ratification.'"
The ballots used in the general election by the voters were in accord with the requirement contained in the Governor's order. "The calling of the election aforesaid and the holding of the election as aforesaid, and the declaring of the result of the election ratifying the constitutional proposal for the new county of Lanier was and is unconstitutional and void, for the reason that the Governor exceeded his authority as hereinbefore defined, in that he had no authority to call an election in the manner and form in which he called the same, by prescribing the ticket in the manner as...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
DeJarnette v. Hospital Authority of Albany
... ... unless it is impossible reasonably to reconcile it ... Stewart v. County of Bacon, 148 Ga. 105(4), 95 S.E ... 983; Clements v. Powell, 155 Ga. 278(5), 116 S.E ... 624. 'A Statute must be construed with reference to the ... whole system of which it forms a part.' ... ...
-
Copeland v. State, S97A1013
...210 Ga. 1(5), 77 S.E.2d 531 (1953); DeJarnette v. Hospital Authority of Albany, 195 Ga. 189(7), 23 S.E.2d 716 (1942); Clements v. Powell, 155 Ga. 278, 116 S.E. 624 (1923); Stewart v. Bacon County, 148 Ga. 105(4), 95 S.E. 983 (1918). And constitutional provisions relating to the same subject......
-
Birdsey v. Wesleyan College, 18858
...are not required to be printed upon the ballot in toto, and under the rulings of this court in Hammond v. Clark, supra, Clements v. Powell, 155 Ga. 278, 116 S.E. 624, and Cartledge v. City Council of Augusta, 189 Ga. 267, 5 S.E.2d 661, this contention of the plaintiffs was properly It is in......
-
McLucas v. State Bridge Bldg. Authority
...conflict, and when they cannot reasonably stand together. Stewart v. County of Bacon, 148 Ga. 105, 95 S.E. 983; Clements v. Powell, 155 Ga. 278, 116 S.E. 624; DeJarnette v. Hospital Authority of Albany, 195 Ga. 189, 204, 23 S.E.2d 716; 16 C.J.S., Constitutional Law, § 42, page 6. There is m......