State v. McDiarmid
Supreme Court of Arkansas
QUO WARRANTO. We submit it was competent for the legislature to repeal the act of July 9, 1868, which made the county clerks of the several counties, ex-officio recorders thereof, and confer the duties*of recorder upon another officer. The office of recorder is not an office created by the Constitution. ' See Sec. I, Chap. 142, Gould’s Dig. The Constitution of 1836 is silent as to the office of recorder — it was created by act of legislature.
Read the full summary
QUO WARRANTO. We submit it was competent for the legislature to repeal the act of July 9, 1868, which made the county clerks of the several counties, ex-officio recorders thereof, and confer the duties*of recorder upon another officer. The office of recorder is not an office created by the Constitution. ' See Sec. I, Chap. 142, Gould’s Dig. The Constitution of 1836 is silent as to the office of recorder — it was created by act of legislature. Under the Constitution of 1836, the office of circuit clerk was a constitutional office, and the act of February 12, 1838, created the office of…
1Opinion of the CourtMcClure, C. J.
At the instance of the Attorney General, a writ of quo warranto was issued against George "W. McDiarmid, commanding him to show by what authority he assumed to exercise the rights, powers and duties of recorder of Pulaski county.
Tho defendant, McDiarmid, filed a response to the writ, setting np that he is of lawful age; that he is a qualified elector, and that on the 14th of March, 1868, Ire was duly elected clerk of Pulaski county, Arkansas; that he was commissioned as such clerk by the then Governor of Arkansas; that he took tho oath of office before an officer authorized by law to…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Cain v. Woodruff CountySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- Hutton v. KingSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1918
- Newton, County Judge v. EdwardsSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1941
- Cherry v. WebbSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1938