The Newtown bee., 1907-11-22
The NeWtoWn Bee
LITCHFIELD COUNTY.
Warren.
Neslosn. Friday, November r, lyo'.

THE TOWN ELECTION MATTER.
 November l. 1907.
 Mir William forestele,
 Warren, Conn.
 Dear Sir: We have been unable to give the matter of your inquiry eon- eernlng the power of the officers of your town to hold over in consequence of the failure to elect new officers at the last annual town meeting until to-day.
 We have examined the matter with a great deal of care, covering the law in our own state and in adjoining states so far AS our library permits. and we have come unhesitatlngly to this con cluson: that all of our town officers chosen at the annual meeting in 1906 still continue to hold their respective offices independent of the failure of your town to choose their successors at the last annual town meeting. Of course. as we informed you when here. the provisions of statute specifically state in regard to certain offices. that town clerks. treasurers. and assessors, hold over until their successors are ap- pointed. In regard to the other officials. where that statutory provision does not exist, we are convinced as above stated that. under the decisions in our own state and the general law. they also continue in office.
 It was very early decided in the case of a constable who is one of the an nual officers and who had been elected but not qualified that he continued as a lawful constable though not sworn un- til afterwards. Kelly vs. Wright ct ux. 1 Root, S3.
 In the case of Mo Call vs. Byram, 6 Conn.,, 43S, it was established as a well settled principle that an annual officer continued until superseded by the ap- pointment of another in his place, and the same case emphatically states that an election to an office for year had never been considered as of the de- scription which terminated at the end of the year.
 Later, in 1883. the court said, in the case of Spencer vs. Champion, Conn.,, H3: "The principle is too well settled to be controverted that an annual off, cer, if there is no restrictive provis- ion in his appointment, holds his office until superseded by the appointment of another. The same principle is enunciated in the case of Pickett vs. Allen, 10 Conn.,, 153, and in July, 1884, in the case of Bethany vs. Sperry, 10 Conn.,, 207, the Court stated: "In this state it must now be considered as set tied that the annual officers of both public and private corporations hold their officers until others are appointed in their places unless there be some restrictive provision in the statute or charter creating them"
 There is another principle which may be invoked to establish our opinion in this matter, and whi oh from the very necessities of the ca se, to con- serve the rights of the public and main tain government itself, the law has established and settled beyond con troversy, and that is the general rule that one who comes into office legally and continues to hold possession of the office and exercises the duties and func- tions thereof, after the time for which he was elected or appointed expires, and when no successor has been elect ted or appointed to take his place, is an officer de facto. There is great mass of authorities sustaining this in this country and in England. The acts of an officer de fac to, whether judicial or ministerial, are valid so far as the rights of the public or third persons having an interest in such acts are concerned, and neither the title of such officer nor the validity of his acts as such can be indirectly called in question in proceeding to which he is not party. Plymouth vs. Painter, IT Conn.,, 585.
 The exhaustive opinion in State vs. Carroll, 38 Conn.,, 449, given in 1871, clearly characterizes de facto officer, and establishes the validity of his acts.
 As we understood you when here, you expected that all of the officials chosen in 1906 were willing to contin- le in their respective positions; if, however, any of them decline so to do, we have no question that your Board of Selectman have full and complete to appoint others in their place, taking the precaution, however, to obtain from such parties who de- cline to act their written resignation or 1eclination.
 Yours very truly,
 Warner & Landon.
 Dl11.Lor1