King v. Texas County
Supreme Court of Missouri
Appeal from Texas Circuit Court. — Hon. L. B. Woodside, Judge. (1) The compensation of a county clerk is an annual compensation — not quarterly. Allen v. Cowan, 96 Mo. 193; Lycettv. Wolff, 45 Mo.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Texas Circuit Court. — Hon. L. B. Woodside, Judge. (1) The compensation of a county clerk is an annual compensation — not quarterly. Allen v. Cowan, 96 Mo. 193; Lycettv. Wolff, 45 Mo. App. 489. For the year 1896 it was measured by the year from January 1, 1896, to January 1, 1897. If within that time it was proven in a legal way that the population of the county had increased from less than twenty thousand to twenty-two thousand, then the county was immediately transferred to a higher class. The election was the means provided by law for ascertaining the population of the county…
1Opinion of the CourtRobinson, J.
The essential facts presented by the record in this case are as follows:
At the general election in November, 1894, the plaintiff was elected clerk of the county court of Texas *62county for the term of four years, commencing January 1, 1895, and duly qualified as such. At the presidential election held in said county in November, 1892, the number of votes cast for President and other officers voted for thereat, was less than four thousand; but at the next succeeding presidential election in November, 1896, the total number of votes cast in such county was four thousand four hundred. The…
2Cited by2 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Moss v. HamiltonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1924
- Schureman v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co.Missouri Court of Appeals · 1901