Jones v. McDade
Decision Date | 17 May 1917 |
Docket Number | 3 Div. 296 |
Citation | 75 So. 988,200 Ala. 230 |
Parties | JONES et al. v. McDADE. |
Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
Rehearing Denied June 21, 1917
Appeal from Circuit Court, Montgomery County; Gaston Gunter, Judge.
Bill by W.R. McDade against R.H. Jones and others, as the Board of Revenue of Montgomery County. From a decree for complainant defendants appeal. Reversed, and bill dismissed, and judgment rendered.
The acts and the proposal referred to in the opinion are as follows:
An act to submit to the qualified voters of the state of Alabama at the general election to be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday of November, 1916, for their consideration, an amendment to the Constitution of the state fixing the salaries and compensations and allowances to be paid to the judge of probate, sheriff, the tax assessor and the tax collector of Montgomery county requiring the said officers to cover the fees collected by them into the county treasury of Montgomery county and authorizing and empowering the Legislature thereafter to fix and regulate and alter the costs, charges, and fees and salaries of such officers including the method and basis of their compensation.
Be it enacted by the Legislature of Alabama:
Article XVIII. Mode of Amending the Constitution.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Grayson
...to with approval in the opinions rendered, on pages 400, 401 and 402 of 205 Ala. (87 So. 387) of the majority opinion. In Jones v. McDade, 200 Ala. 230, 233, 75 So. 988, was declared that "the inquiry whether the organic law has been validly and effectually amended is *** a judicial questio......
-
Opinion of the Justices, In re
...its amendment were transacted in violation thereof, then the amendment may be collaterally assailed to test its validity. Jones v. McDade, 200 Ala. 230, 75 So. 988. But if there perhaps be irregularities in complying with a constitutional prescription, which matters do not or are not requir......
-
State v. Clements
...86 So. 28; Ex parte Hardy, 68 Ala. 303; Moog v. Randolph, 77 Ala. 597; Farrior v. N.E. M. Sec. Co., 88 Ala. 275, 7 So. 200; Jones v. McDade, 200 Ala. 230, 75 So. 988. In absence of direct decisions by this court to the contrary, under the definitions contained in section 110 of the Constitu......
-
Johnson v. Craft
...an excellent example of common sense construction in denial of the plain letter of the Constitution in the case of Jones v. McDade, 200 Ala. 230, 75 So. 988, dealing with the requirement of this same section of the Constitution that "proposed amendments shall be read in the house in which t......