Malcom v. Gardner
New York Supreme Court
Writ of right, in the same form as that in the preceding cause,(a) for lands in the 1 Oth ward of the city of New-York. Return in the same form,(b) except that the proclamations were returned as being made at a church in the 1th ■ward of the city of New-York, being the nearest church to the premises within mentioned.
Read the full summary
Writ of right, in the same form as that in the preceding cause,(a) for lands in the 1 Oth ward of the city of New-York. Return in the same form,(b) except that the proclamations were returned as being made at a church in the 1th ■ward of the city of New-York, being the nearest church to the premises within mentioned. And because it did not say there was no church in the 10th ward, Slosson and T. A. Emmet, took exception, on the tenant being called, and insisted that a grand cape could not go. P. W. Radcliff, for demandant. The statute (1 R. L. 88,) is, that proclamation shall be made at the…
1Opinion of the Court
Curia.
We think that ¿oron and place, as they are used in this statute, mean the same thing, and refer to any small subdivision answering to a town, or being substantially the same. That it is the same, for thé purposes of election, is one instance. In this view of the case, proclamation should have been made at the church nearest the land in the 1 Oth ward, if there be any church in that ward ; and, if there be none, this should be stated in the return, to warrant a proclamation out of the ward.
The Court granted leave to amend in this case, also, but as there was in truth a church in the 10th…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Street v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1870
- Com. v. Wilson, Z.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018