The Mount Holly news. [volume] (Mount Holly, Burlington Co., N.J.) 1891-1942, 1914-06-23
Who Is Supervisor +?

yesterday morning TO listen to teStlmOn
and argument on the case of Samuel c
Roberts against the county of Burling
ton to recover salary due him as count,
supervisor of roads. This is a case grow
ing out of the action of the small Boar,
of Freeholders in appointing Mr.. Robert
supervisor of the roads in September
1913. On the first day of January las
when the large Board again took charg,
of the county affairs it elected Stuar
Mcfarland as supervisor. Roberts, how
ever, claimed to be the officer who
should be recognized and he refused tC
relinquish any official documents in his
possession or give any information thai
would aid the man who claimed to be
his successor.
Judge Homer represented Mr.. Roberts
and the latter testified that he was
elected supervisor by the small Board
and held the office without objection
from any source until after the first OF
January when Mcfarland was chosen.
He made formal protest when Macfar-
land presented his bond and then began
a contest for the Office.
V. Claude Palmer, who appeared for
Mr.. Mcfarland, moved for non-suit,
presenting several reasons for this action
but Judge Carrow said he would hear
the case through before giving any de-
cision.
Mr.. Palmer then called Mcfarland,
who told of his election and said that
during the recess of the session of the
Board of Freeholders at which he was
elected Roberts went to him and ex
tended congratulations and said he
would meet him the following Monday,
turn over books and papers and show
what work was to be done. Mcfarland
waited for Roberts all day on the Mon
day designated, but the latter failed to
appear until towards evening and then
be refused to give him any information
whatever. On cross-examination Mac
farland said he could not give the exact
language used by Roberts, but his mind
was very clear on the day of the occur
renee and he remembered the substance
Of the talk.
Isaac Brown, member of the Board
rom Eastampton township, said he
heard the conversation as related bv
Budd NJ. Rigg, solicitor OF the Board,
gave testimony along the same line,
md so did Charles E. Joyce, member of
he Board from Southampton. Mr.
Joyce said his mind was perfectly clear
It the time Of the conversation and he
distinctly recalled it.
Mr.. Roberts was called in rebuttal and
lie said he told Mcfarland he would
urn the books and other information
'ver with the proviso eff it was shown
hat Mcfarland was legally entitled to
HEM"
This ended the testimony and Mr..
Palmer moved that a verdict be rem
Tered in favor of the county, thus show
ng that Mcfarland was the legal officer.
1r. Palmer contended that Roberts was
lected by de facto Board, BODY
which did not possess the power to make
he selection. He called attention to the |
act that Mr.. Roberts was member of |
he small Board and resignedl to be |
lected supervisor. The law was quoted |
0 show that Mr.. Roberts was not en-
tiled to be elected supervisor during the |
erm for which he was elected Freebooter
nd not until his successor had been
lected and qualified. 1t had been
hown that George S. Maxwell, who |
ucceeded Mr.. Roberts, had not been
lected or qualified when the latter was
made supervisor.
Judge Horner contended that the
mall Board had acted legally as a de
acto body, and had done everything
hat Board of Freeholders was entitled
D do. He quoted two cases, one of
7hich was an opinion by the Court of
Errors and Appeals, to the effect that
efacto body had the right to perform
ny act that was required by de jure
ody. These two terms are as follows:
)e facto-In fact, in reality, actually ex-
sting whether with or without legal or
1oral right. De jure means by right,
ccording to law. Judge Horner said
his appointment of Roberts was to fill a
acancy which the law required to be
lied, the term of which, by statute, was
We years. The small Board was COM
elled to fill the office, and under the
ecision quoted, the appointment was
legal. If there was desire to
ust Mr.. Roberts quo warranto proceed
ngs should have been resorted to in
rider to have him removed.
Judge Carrow said he would take the
ase under consideration and asked the
awyers to present briefs to him, showing
he opinions on which they relied. Hell
omitted he cleaned towards Macfar-
and's SIDE" but wanted to examine the
ntire facts thoroughly. He did not give
ny attention to the conversations re-
ated to have taken place between
roberts and mcfarland as they did not
mount to anything. Simply saying
hat he would do certain things did not |
Constitute resignation on the part of |
'Ir. Roberts. The whole matter hinged |
m the statutes and the opinions touch |
ng similar cases. A decision will prob |
IDLY be rendered within week.
The golden rule" store. Boyce's. adv