Hillsman v. Faison

• Decision Date: 27 April 1900
• Parties: HILLSMAN et al. v. FAISON, County Attorney.<SMALL><SUP>1</SUP></SMALL>
• Court: Texas Court of Appeals

57 S.W. 920

HILLSMAN et al. v. FAISON, County Attorney.¹

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas.

April 27, 1900.

Appeal from district court, Fayette county; H. Teichmueller, Judge.

Suit by J. C. Hillsman and others against Percy Faison, county attorney. From a judgment for defendant, plaintiffs appeal. Affirmed.

Brown, Lane & Garwood and Wolters & Lane, for appellants. Robson & Duncan, Ed H. Moss, and Percy Faison, for appellee.

PLEASANTS, J.

Appellants instituted this suit against the county attorney of Fayette county to contest an election held in the town of Ledbetter, in said county, on the 24th day of July, 1899, to determine whether or not a tax should be levied for school purposes; said town of Ledbetter and adjacent territory having been incorporated for school purposes only under the provisions of chapter 15, Rev. St. The result of the election, as declared by the proper officers, was in favor of said tax, the vote being 35 to 16. It is admitted that 12 of the 35 voters who voted in favor of said tax were not assessed as taxpayers upon the assessment rolls of Fayette county for the year 1898, which rolls were closed August 15, 1898, and were the last assessment rolls of said county prior to said election. Each and all of said 12 voters are qualified voters of said county and incorporated territory, and were on the 1st day of January, 1899, and at the time of the said election, owners of property situate within said incorporated territory, subject to taxation.

Appellants contend that the court below erred in holding that said 12 voters whose names do not appear upon the last assessment rolls of said county preceding said election were legal voters at said election. This is the only issue presented for our determination. Article 3998, c. 15, Rev. St., under which the election in question was held, provides that "no person shall vote at said election unless he be a qualified voter under the constitution and laws of this state, and a taxpayer in said incorporated district. * * *" Appellants insist that, although said 12 voters are qualified voters of said incorporation under the constitution and laws of this state, they are not taxpayers in said district, within the purview of the statute above quoted, because their names do not appear upon the last assessment rolls of said county, and therefore they were not entitled to vote at said election. In support of their contention, appellants cite article 3942 of the Revised Statutes, which is as follows: "All persons who are legal qualified voters of this state, and of the county of their residence, and who are resident property taxpayers in said district, as shown by the last assessment rolls of the county, shall be entitled to vote in any such school districts. * * *" This article of the statute is contained in chapter 10 of the Revised Statutes, and refers to elections held...