Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1893-11-20

I lea FsaN
sustained (46 Ohio. ST. 5asi N N. wv
~; 105 n. s.. 143, on Ma sdS. M na
Mo. 40; To X. l.. 59T: 81 Aiicb ~
40 Feb. Ry., ~ N'' 'o'
This second class Of cases $780,.
establish the proposition that the osso,.
Of a corporation cirmmstanced ns va
the hardware company copsiit,,,o W. W.
fund Il" uus'
The conditions Of the eornor,tons %,
forth in the questions propoundeI ,s,de ~.
the long recognized rules Of eality can.
terrcd upon every unsecured rre,iitnr ~
the corporation the right 10 n ratehia
share of the proceeds Of al the nssets ~
me c9rporatlon not subject to prioritles
lawtuhy existing when Ibis condition
at9se, anu we therefore answer that
neither the stockholders nor directors az
the insolvent corporation hld iav-frl
| power under the facts stated 10 make n
preferential deed OF trust, whereby any
| creultor whether atOclsholder direefor
or other officers Of the corporation or
NOT could acquire preference. and that
me attempted preferene would be In.
yaud as TO other creditors OF the cor
poration, Option by Stayton, c. j.
state Of Texts eS rel Barry VS.. Con.
| nor. from Dallas, certified question from
Fifth district.
l. is an agreed statement Of facts
| upon which case was tried in the court
| below ana which the court embodied IN
lts Judgment sufficient in the absence
Of a statement Of ehe facts or findings
of facts by the court or agreed case f0r
appeal under the statute 10 authorize a
revision Of the Judgment upon matters
growing ont OF such factsy
= is the statement In regard 10 the
lI4I unnumbered ballots as contained Ia
the first clause Of the said agreement
81 "a Va H.. Al
ment OF the facts as 10 show how said
ballots were cast and counted as 10
authorize this court TO revise such judy
ment upon fhe factsg
3. j. It necessary under the coustiui-
tion and laws Of Texas and the charter
Of the city Of Dallas, set forth In said
above agreement, after the adoption By
the city council Of the city Of Dallas OF
The act Of April L., 1852, commonly
known as the Australian ballot system,
"that all ballots cast IN an election IN
said city for city officers shall be num-
bered.' and If so is such requirement
directory or mandatory
4. If such unnumbcred ballots can in
any event be counted can this be done
by the court In the absence Of testimony
showing the bona iidce Of the ballotsg
The first question is answered in the
affirmative tAriiCc 1872, u, 81 IN
cooperating The agreed statement In the
record By the court Us much an approval
rs II NE judge had made certificate
nnder the statute. lFOwler vs.. Simpson.
~ Texas, 6lf1
The second question must be answered
In the affirmative, II there was any doubt
arising upon the language of the agree
ment reference TO the amended original
information and the allegations therein
made would cure IL.
ne tlird question embraces twn propo
slllons' u Did the law require the
olhSers conducting The election In the city
Of Dallas 10 number the ballots In com-
pMlnce win article 1871, II. G, s.; and
W II so could they legally count ballots
NOT numbcred.
Articles lU!l aud 1851 were In force
m the city OF Dallas NJ the time and the
olhcerS Should have held the election In
acGoruahee wiih ghe requirements Of
article lU0i' The law is mandatory and
ballots not numbered can not be counted.
II is claimed that the act Of April Il
ls34, repcals article 1904 By act Of
March 10, ISIS. ballots were required
to be numbered. In 1870 a law was
passed providing that the words stale"
district aud congress should be writ.
ten on the ballots according TO the office
voted for. In an election in 1877 re.
turns with ballots numbered were thrown
out; In 1913 the law of 1870 was re-
pealed. In 1916 provision was made for
the numbering of ballots in the constitu-
tion (section 4. article @. In the amend
ment to the constitution in 1891 the pro-
hibili0n of registration was Withdrawn,
but the purpose to have the ballots num-
bered was again expressed. We can not
presume that the legislature IN enact
ing the law Of April II. 1892, intended
TO prohibit the doing of an act which
was commanded by the constitution and
the law enacted in pursuance thereof
nothing short of positive and uneQuivocal
words could be construed, Section IS Of
the act Of April l., 1892, does not pro-
libit the numbering of ballots, but for
bids the officers putting marks upon them
which would enable any one without
looking into it to tell by whom it was
cast. The act Of April IL Is not in IL
self q complete system for holding elcc-
tons In cities Of 10000 population. II
is evidently intended simply as additional
means OF detecting and preventing fraud
and preserving the purity Of the ballot.
The law does not continue beyond the
election for which registration Is ordered,
but at each election the same steps must
be taken anew. If the contention Of mp.
pellees Is good in u general election the
ballots outside Of the city voting under
this law would be numbered, while those
in the city would not Such possible CON
sequences serve 10 show the correct in
terpretntion to be placed upon the law.
IT IL claimed that the legislature has