Horton v. Watson
Supreme Court of Kansas
Error from Douglas District Court. Action brought by Horton against Watson, under the pror visions of article 6, chapter 36, of the General Statutes of 1868 to determine the right of the contestor to the office of county-treasurer of Douglas county.
Read the full summary
Error from Douglas District Court. Action brought by Horton against Watson, under the pror visions of article 6, chapter 36, of the General Statutes of 1868 to determine the right of the contestor to the office of county-treasurer of Douglas county. The contestor claimed that at the general election held November 6, 1877, he was legally elected to said office, and that the contestee, Watson, who had been declared duly elected thereto at said election, was ineligible thereto, because of the provision in section 3 of article 9 of the state constitution, that no person shall hold the office of…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by.
Valentine, J.:
The main question involved in this case is, whether James E. Watson was eligible to hold the office of county treasurer of Douglas county for the term commencing on the second Tuesday of October, 1876, and ending on the second Tuesday of October, 1878. And this question depends entirely upon the construction to be given to our constitution and statutes; for there is no question with regard to the facts of the case. The facts are all admitted.
Up to November, 1876, section 3 of article 9 of the constitution was as follows:
“All county…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Riddel v. School District No. 72Supreme Court of Kansas · 1875
- Monger v. Board of CommissionersSupreme Court of Kansas · 1879
3Cited by6 opinions
- Wilson v. ClarkSupreme Court of Kansas · 1901
- Pruitt v. SquiresSupreme Court of Kansas · 1902
- Dodson v. BowlbyNebraska Supreme Court · 1907
- Coates v. CampSupreme Court of Kansas · 1946
- Dickinson v. BurkeNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1898
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.