Lynch v. Lafland

• Decision Date: 30 April 1867
• Citation: Lynch v. Lafland, 44 Tenn. 96 (Tenn. 1867)
• Parties: Lynch v. Lafland et als.
• Court: Tennessee Supreme Court

44 Tenn. 96

Lynch

v.Lafland et als.

Supreme Court of Tennessee.

April Term, 1867.

FROM MEMPHIS.

Chancellor WILLIAM M. SMITH, pronounced a decree in favor of the complainant, at the _____ Term, 1867.Respondents appealed.

GEO. GANNT, for Complainant.

A. WRIGHT, R. J. MORGAN, and E. M. YERGER, for Respondents.

MILLIGAN, J., delivered the opinion of the Court.

This bill was filed in the Chancery Court at Memphis, to restrain the Mayor and Aldermen of the City Corporation, from interfering with the complainant, Lynch, in the exercise of his duties as “City Physician,” for the 40th corporation year, under the city charter.

It seems that this officer is required to be elected annually, and as soon as practicable, after the general election for Mayor and Aldermen, which, by the charter, is required to be held on the last Thursday in June, in each year.This election was not held at the regular time, for the 40th corporation year, but was postponed, in consequence of the passage of the Act, known as the Franchise Law, passed on the 3d of May, 1866, until the registration of votes required by that Act, could be completed and reported to the Governor who was then to issue his proclamation and writs of election, to fill all vacant offices.Under this Act of the Legislature, the Mayor and Board of Aldermen of the city, were elected, in October, 1866.But prior to this time, the board elected for the 39th corporation year--holding over until their successors were elected and qualified, in July, 1866--elected the complainant, “City Physician;”he gave bond as required by the city ordinance, and was regularly inducted into office.The new board came in, and, by resolution, adopted by more than two-thirds of the board, declared this and other offices vacant; and thereupon proceeded to elect one Dr. Woodward, in place of the complainant, as ““City Physician,” who was also qualified as required by the city ordinance; and, under the instructions of the Mayor, demanded the custody and control of the City Hospital, medical stores, surgical instruments property, etc., thereunto belonging.

The Chancellor declared the complainant lawfully entitled to the office of ““City Hospital Physician,” for one year from the date of his election; and restrained, by injunction, the defendants, from, in any way, interfering with him in the exercise of his duties as such, etc.From this decree, the defendants appealed in error to this Court.

The question presented involves the consideration of the power of the two boards, and the validity of the complainant's election, for the 40th corporate year, by the board elected for the 39th corporation year.

By the City Charter, the Aldermen are elected, by the qualified voters of their respective wards, for one year.The Mayor is elected by the qualified voters of the city, and holds his office for one year, and until his successor is duly elected and qualified.The Recorder, Wharf Master, Chief of Police, Tax Collectors, etc., are, in like manner, elected by the people for one year, and hold their offices until their successors are elected and qualified.

In addition, the charter creates several other enumerated officers, such as City Register, Treasurer, City Engineer, Inspectors, and Captains of the Day, and of the Night, Police, etc., whose terms of office are to be prescribed by ordinance.These officers are elected by the Board of Aldermen, and hold their offices, by the terms of the charter, until their successors are qualified.

The charter also provides: “There shall be such other officers and agents of the corporation, as may be provided by ordinance, to be elected by the Board of Aldermen, to perform such duties as may be prescribed by ordinance.”

Under this provision of the charter, it seems an ordinance was passed, creating and defining, and limiting the duties and terms of certain enumerated officers; among which, are, City Comptroller, City Register, Street Commissioner, Treasurer, Engineer, etc.--all of whom are to be elected by the Board of Aldermen, and hold their offices until their successors are appointed and qualified, unless sooner removed.

The office of City Physician, does not appear, under this ordinance, to have been created; but afterwards, this office is created by an ordinance, somewhat similar in its provisions to the former ordinance.It provides, that the “City Hospital Physician” shall be annually appointed by the Mayor and Aldermen, and that he shall be responsible to them, and hold his office “for one year, and until his successor is elected and qualified; but may be, for good cause, dismissed by vote of the board.”

These several offices, as well as those created by the...