State ex rel. McCune v. Ralls Cnty. Court
| Decision Date | 31 October 1869 |
| Citation | 45 Mo. 58 |
| Parties | STATE OF MISSOURI ex rel. SAMUEL C. MCCUNE, Relator, v. THE RALLS COUNTY COURT, Respondent. |
| Court | Missouri Supreme Court |
Petition for mandamus.
Geo. H. Shields, and H. B. Johnson, for relator.
Sharp & Broadhead, for respondent.
At the March term of this court a judgment of ouster was rendered against John H. Steers, then usurping the office of sheriff of Ralls county. The facts upon which the judgment was based were that said Steers and the present relator, Samuel McCune, were the only candidates before the people at the general election of 1868, for the office of sheriff of Ralls county; that the said McCune received a majority of the votes cast for that office, but that the county clerk improperly refused to count the votes of one of the precincts of the county, which refusal changed the result and gave a majority to Steers, to whom he issued his certificate, and who obtained his commission. The court held that the clerk had no right thus to reject the votes of a precinct, and that Steers was not elected to and entitled to the office. Upon the rendition of this judgment, the present relator exhibited to the governor such evidence of his election that he gave him a commission as sheriff of said Ralls county, and he took the oath and presented his bond as sheriff to the Circuit Court, which was approved. In the meantime the County Court, upon notice of the judgment of ouster against Steers, declared a vacancy, appointed Steers to fill it, and ordered a new election under the statute. The judges refused to recognize the relator as sheriff or fix his bond, but he filed and presented one as county collector, admitted to be sufficient to cover the State and county revenue, and tendered it to the County Court, with proof of the requisite responsibility of the signers; but the court made an order rejecting it, without giving any reasons.
This court, at the relation of said McCune, issued an alternative writ of mandamus, directed to the said County Court of Ralls, to “accept and approve the said bond and recognize the relator as the lawful sheriff of the county,” or show cause, etc. To this writ the respondents make return that by virtue of the judgment upon said writ of quo warranto, the office of sheriff and collector of Ralls county became vacant; that, under the constitution, it became their duty to fill said vacancy by appointment until it could be filled by election; that they filled the vacancy by the appointment of said Steers, and ordered a special election; and, having made such appointment and order, they could not approve the relator's bond.
The return assumes that the judgment of ouster...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. Ewing v. Francis
...43 Mo. 3; State, etc., v. Kupferle, 44 Ind. 155. Quo warranto is the proper remedy to determine contested elections. State, etc., v. Ralls County Court, 45 Mo. 58; State, etc., v. Boal, 46 Mo. 528; State, etc., v. Vail, 53 Mo. 97; State, etc., v. Claggett, 73 Mo. 388; State, etc., v. John, ......
-
State ex rel. Attorney Gen. v. Seay
...333; People vs. Whitman, 10 Cal. 46; 38 Mo. 193.) That there was no vacancy; see further, People vs. Lord, 9 Mich. 231; State, etc. vs. Ralls County Court, 45 Mo. 58; People vs. Forquer, Breese [Ill.], 104; Pappan vs. Gray, 9 Paige, 507; People vs. Van Horne, 18 Wend. 515; State vs. McCalli......
-
State ex rel. Metcalf v. Garesche
...Stat. 569; §§ 24, 25; State v. Wilson, 49 Mo. 146; State v. Howard Co. Ct., 41 Mo. 247; State v. Lafayette Co. Ct., Ib, 545; State v. Ralls Co. Ct., 45 Mo. 58; State v. Rodman, 43 Mo. 256; State v. Harrison, 38 Mo. 540; State v. The Treasurer, 43 Mo. 228; People v. Supervisors, 12 John. 414......
- In re Saline Cnty. Subscription