The Mayor and Council of Madison v. Wade et al.

Supreme Court of Georgia1892-01-19

88 Ga. 699

Summary · law.co

Holding. The judgment enjoining the mayor and council from collecting the school tax and establishing public schools was affirmed.

Citizens and taxpayers of Madison petitioned to enjoin the city's mayor and council from collecting a tax for public schools and establishing such schools, challenging the validity of an election held under a legislative act from 1889. The city had adopted an ordinance establishing voter registration procedures for corporate elections, with registration closing on March 21, 1891. However, when a school election took place on July 16, 1891, no new registration book was opened for that special election, and only those whose names appeared on the March registration list were permitted to vote. The registration list contained 406 names, though the mayor and council later determined that some registrants—including minors and convicted persons—were not actually qualified voters. The school election resulted in 269 votes in favor and 18 opposed, despite only 249 votes being cast at the preceding municipal election.

The petitioners challenged the election's legality on multiple grounds, including that the 1889 act was unconstitutional because it referenced "qualified voters voting at such election" rather than "qualified voters of the city," and that the mayor and council lacked authority to use an outdated registration list closed three months before the school election without conducting a new registration process. The petitioners argued that if the 1877 registration statute applied to special elections like the school election, a fresh registration was required.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

Whether a voter registration list closed for municipal elections may be used to restrict voting in a special school election
Whether the 1889 school act was constitutional in requiring approval by qualified voters voting at the election rather than all qualified voters of the city
Whether the mayor and council had authority to prohibit voting by persons not on an outdated registration list for a special election

Procedural posture

The case came before Judge Jenkins in Morgan County at chambers on September 12, 1891, following a petition by citizens and taxpayers seeking to enjoin municipal officials from implementing a school tax approved through the challenged election.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

majority opinion

Judgment affirmed.

Municipal corporations. Local statutes. Constitutional law. Schools. Elections. ^Registration. Before Judge Jenkins. Morgan county. At chambers, September 12, 1891.

On the petition of Wade et al., citizens and taxpayers of Madison, the mayor and council of that city were enjoined from collecting a tax assessed for the support of public- schools, from establishing such schools, etc., under an election held by virtue of the act of the legislature, approved October 25, 1889. Bythe act ot February 1, 1877, the mayor and council were “empowered and authorized to enact such ordinance, or ordinances, providing for the registration of the voters in corporate elections in the city, which in their discretion shall conduce to the interest and peace of said city, not in conflict with the constitution and laws of the State,” etc. The mayor and council adopted an ordinance providing that on the 1st of January the clerk of council should open a book for the registration of voters, which book should be evidence of a voter having registered; that the qualifications for registration should be the same as those prescribed for voters for members of the General Assembly; that the registration should cease and the book be closed on the tenth day preceding the annual election of mayor and aldermen, etc. The day fixed for the election of mayor and aldermen is the first Wednesday in April. The clerk opened a registration book on or before Januaiy 1, 1891, kept it open until March 21, 1891, and then closed it. No book was opened for registration for the school- election which took place on July. 16, 1891; and no person who had failed to register prior to March 21, 1891, or had become qualified to vote between that date and the date of the school election, had an opportunity to register therefor. The registration list shown by the book was furnished to the managers of the school election to guide and control them therein. They were not instructed not to permit any one to vote whose name was not on the registration book, but they did not so permit any one whose name was not on the list. The declared result was, 269 votes for and 18 votes against public schools. At the last preceding municipal election 249 votes were polled. The registration list contained 406 names, but the mayor and council, on investigation, determined that a number of these were actually not qualified voters, there being three minors, two convicts, etc.

Foster & Butler and H. T. Lewis, for plaintiff in error.

J. A. Billups and Calvin George, contra.

Among the grounds alleged in the petition why the election was illegal and void were: The act of 1889 is unconstitutional in that it provides, “if at any election herein provided for two thirds of the qualified voters votiug at such election shall vote for free schools,” etc., instead of providing that if two thirds of the. qualified voters of the city shall vote for free schools, etc. There was no law authorizing registration for a special election of this character, hut if the act of 1877 applies to such special elections, there should have been a new registration thereunder, and the mayor and council wore not authorized to turn over to the managers the list closed on March 21, and to instruct them not to receive the vote of any person whose name was not thereon. Other grounds of attack on the result of the election, as declared by the mayor and council, need not be stated here.