State v. Fowler
| Decision Date | 22 June 1895 |
| Citation | 66 Conn. 294,33 A. 1005 |
| Court | Connecticut Supreme Court |
| Parties | STATE ex rel. OAKEY v. FOWLER. |
BALDWIN, J. (dissenting). On May 6th, 1894, Frederick S. Brown died, while holding the two offices of collector of taxes for the town of Hartford and collector of taxes for the city of Hartford. His term of office, as respects each of these positions, would have expired at the close of that day, and he had been reappointed to each for the next term of two years, beginning on May 7th. It was provided by law (Gen. St. 1866, p. 729, § 94; Gen. St. 1888, § 3902) that whenever a vacancy should exist in either of these offices the remaining collector should discharge all the duties of the vacant office for the unexpired portion of the term; and that, in case a vacancy should exist in both of said offices, "the same shall be filled for the unexpired portion of said term, by a major vote of the selectmen of said town, and the aldermen of said city, at a meeting specially called and warned by the mayor of the city for that purpose." Until May 11. 1894, a vacancy existed in both of said offices, and on that day the selectmen undertook to fill it, as respects that of collector of town taxes. In my opinion, if Gen. St. 1888, § 63, authorizes the appointment of such a collector by the town or the selectmen, in case of a vacancy in both the offices of collector of town taxes and collector of city taxes in Hartford, it is only when there has been a failure to pursue or an unreasonable delay in pursuing the other mode of selection specially provided for by section 3902. That mode, I think, was the action of a majority of those present at a joint meeting of the selectmen of the town and the aldermen of the city, to be specially called and warned by the mayor of the city for that purpose, agreeably to the requirements of section 94, tit. 64, c. 2, of the Revision of 1866. The provisions of that chapter appear to me to have been drawn in contemplation of the probability that both these offices would ordinarily be filled by the same person. That result might naturally be looked for in view of the necessarily close relations of the town and city to each other, the practical identity of interest, and the convenience of the taxpayers. By section 93, repeated in Gen. St. 1888, § 38, the official term of each collector is made the same, thus prolonging that of the collector of the town of Hartford a year beyond that of the collector of any other town in the state; while by section 95, Gen St. 1866, the first selectman of the town and the mayor of the city are required to provide one and the same office for the payment and collection of both town and city taxes, half of the expense of which is to be paid by each municipality. The provision for a joint meeting of representatives of each municipality, to be controlled by a major vote of those participating in it, was well adapted to secure prompt and decisive action in an event which rendered a speedy election of the highest...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Low v. Town Of Madison
...board, State ex rel. Bergin v. Goodrich, 86 Conn. 68, 71, 84 A. 99; see also State ex rel. Oakey v. Fowler, 66 Conn. 294, 298, 32 A. 162, 33 A. 1005; and we have discountenanced the entertainment of a committee of court by a litigant. Beardsley v. Washington, 39 Conn. 265, 268. We have refu......
-
State ex rel. Kenney v. Ranslow, 24691
...if his own vote is necessary to give him a majority, such appointment is void. State ex rel. Oakey v. Fowler, 66 Conn. 294, 298, 32 A. 162, 33 A. 1005; State ex rel. Bergin v. Goodrich, 86 Conn. 68, 71, 84 A. 99. The parties have stipulated that the board voted on September 3, 1958, to hold......
-
State ex rel. Butera v. Lombardi
...of presumed resignation. The defendant claims that the opinion in State ex rel. Oakey v. Fowler, 66 Conn. 294, 299, 32 A. 162, 163, 33 A. 1005, indicates that we have never indorsed the fiction of implied resignation, because we held there that the first office must be formally resigned. Th......
-
Meigs v. Theis
...an intruder out, and its judgment does not award the office to the relator. State ex rel. Oakey v. Fowler, 66 Conn. 294, 301, 32 A. 162, 33 A. 1005; State ex rel. Eberle v. Clark, 87 Conn. 537, 541, A. 172, 52 L.R.A. (N. S.) 912. If the intruder declines to vacate, further proceedings usual......