Staunton spectator and vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1896-1916, 1897-07-22
The LIIIey-condon Contest.

Judge GrlmSly held the special term for
Judge McLaughlin here lat week. The
most interesting case decided by him was
the contested election Case of Lilley VS..
Condor, brief history of the case may be
apropos. At the last general election
Col. Jno. d. Lilley was returned elected
road commissioner from the Riverheads dis
trict. His opponent was Mr. d. Condor,
when the canvassing board met to examine
the returns they decided that Greenville had
no right to vote as that was an incorporated
town, and threw out the whole precinc9
this elected Condor, and he was awarded
the certificate Col. Liiiey then entered a
contest in the County court On a hearing
before Judge Chalkley, he decided that the
County court had no jurisdiction and dis
missed the contest. From this Col. Lilley
appealed to the Circnit Court and the Cir
cult court now reverses, Judge Chalkley
and on an agreed state of facts made the fol-
lowing decision. For the opinion as con-
densed below we are indebted to the Neps.
1st. That the town of Greenville previous
to the act of incorporation of 1883 constituted
a part of the Riverheads magisterial district
of Augusta county, and being part and
parcel of the district. the residents Of said
| town had right to vote for all elective Of
ficers at the polling place for said magis-
terial district.
End. That the act incoI pOrating said town
passed in 1888 does not have the effect of
creating said town into a separate election
district. but is still continues part and parcel
of RiverheadS magisterial district.
3rd. That the third article of the constitu-
| ton in regard to the elective franchise, de-
claring that the voter shall be citizen OF
| the United States and resident OF the coun-
| ty, city or town in which he offers to vote
was not designed to include the towns which
by act of Assembly constitute part and
parcel OF the magisterial districts of coun-
ties but only towns which by the constitu-
tion were designed to have separate Or
ganization and which, in some measure like
the counties, were mere political SubdIyI-
sions of the State for the more convenient
and economical administration of govern
mental affairs and hence the residents OF
Riverbeads district being outside of the town
had the right to vote at polling place Tor
the district within the town and the citizens
Of the town had also the right to vote for
district officers unless prohibited by some
act of the General Assembly.
4th. That the special road law OF 1884
creating road districts in the county accord
ing to the boundary limits of the several
magisteria1 districts made !he town OF
Greenville part and parcel OF the RIVER
n6aQS ROAD ulSIrlCG U0Cau5c IL was d Pdit VI
the magisterial district and the residents OF
said town being qualified voters of the mag
isterial district, were by the terms OF the
road law made qualified voters to vote for
the road commissioner of the Riverheads
road district
9Th. That the mere fact that the town
charter of the town of Greenville provides
for the exemption of the property OF the
town from road tax, and provides that the
town should take care OF its poor, prlVl-
lege which the town might OR might not eX
ercise at it pleasure. do as not disqualify
the residents of said town from voting at the
election held for road commissioner any
more thanit disQualifies them from voting
for supervisor of the district: an officer con-
shutting member of the road board for the
district which board is charged with the
duty of imposing or rather recommending
to the board of supervisors the amount OF
road tax for Rlverheads district. Hence the
action of the board of county canvassers in
excluding from the canvass of votes cast Tor
road commissioner the vote of the Greenville
precinct was Illegal and of no effect. 1t
ought to have been embraced in the count.