State v. Hallett
Supreme Court of Alabama
Novel and difficult questions from the Circuit Court of Talla-dega. Tub defendant was indicted, found guilty, and fined, for voting in the last Presidential election, without being legally qualified to vote.
Read the full summary
Novel and difficult questions from the Circuit Court of Talla-dega. Tub defendant was indicted, found guilty, and fined, for voting in the last Presidential election, without being legally qualified to vote. From a bill of exceptions, it appears, that the defendant was a citizen of Georgia, up to September, 1843 — that about that time, being in this State, he declai'ed his intention to settle in Talladega county, if he could procure a site for an iron foundry, from one Robert Jemison. That between the 1st and 15th of September, he leased from Jemison a place in Talladega county, for this…
1Opinion of the CourtOrmond, J.
— The question presented upon the record, has always been considered one of great moment, and has given rise to much discussion, and ingenious, subtle, reasoning, both in the civil and common law. It appears, however, to be well settled, that when a domicil has been acquired, it is not lost, until a new one is actually gained, facto et animo. The mere intention to change the domicil, without an actual removal, with the intention of remaining, does not cause a loss of the domicil.
Here the facts were, that the defendant, being domiciled in Georgia, came to this State, with the design of…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- The Venus, Rae, MasterSupreme Court of the United States · 1814
3Cited by19 opinions
- Mitchell v. KinneySupreme Court of Alabama · 1942
- Welsh v. ShumwayIllinois Supreme Court · 1907
- Marks v. MarksU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Tennessee · 1896
- Donaldson v. State ex rel. TaylorIndiana Supreme Court · 1906
- Merrill's Heirs v. MorrissettSupreme Court of Alabama · 1884
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.