State v. Foote

Layton, C. J.,

delivering the opinion of the Court:

The question before the Court is whether the oppointment of the defendant required confirmation by the Council. If the appointment did not require confirmation it was in all respects legal, and the defendant is entitled to hold and to exercise the office. On the other hand, if the appointment was not a legal and valid appointment unless confirmed by the Council, the defendant is not entitled to hold the office, but is a usurper.

The Act of 1921 contains no express repeal- of the Act of 1907. It does, however, contain a usual provision, “All…