Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1921-07-26
COURT REFUSES
Continued from Page One)

legally elect one of their own number
to this Office of trust and RESPONSE
bility. No statute in this state pre-
vents this but the relator contends
that as a matter of public policy such
an election should not be upheld.
There is authority for this conten-
ton especially when the election is
to an office of profit and the relations
! between the two offices are such that
the candidates personal interest
might conflict with the perforrna nee
Of his public duties. On this ground
n contract between local board of
health and one of it's own members
for professional services in the care
of person in quarantine was held
void in the recent case Of Lesieur V.
RumfOrd, 113 Maine. 81
! In the case under consideration
the kennebec Water District and the
Fairfield Village Corporation seem TO
have no business relations with each
other and the reasons which apply in
the cases holding such election void
apply with much less force here
still the courts. having in mind. the
best interests Of the public. are
scrupulOuslY careful in such cases
and the validity of that election may
not be wholly free from doubt. In
my view of the case, however, it is
not necessary to squarely decide this
point.
We come now to the second point
OF attack
Mr. Nye continued to serve as trus-
tee of the Water District during the
Years 1919 and 1920. without objection
from any source, and until March 10,
1921, when the relator in letter to
him denied the validity Of the APP
pointment of April 8. 1918. There
upon Mr.. Nye delivered to his two
associates on the board Of assessors
the following communication:
Fairfield, Ne March IL. 1921.
To Whom 1t May Concern:
| hereby tender my resignation as
a member of the Board of Assessors
lof the kendalrs Mills Village Cor
poratiOn, the same to take effect at
once.
(Sgncd) William W. Nye."
The name of the Fairfield Village
Corporation was formerly the Ken
dall's Mills Village Corporation.
The remaining members accepted
this resignation on the same day and
ut once proceeded to elect Mr.. Nye as
trustee of the Water District This
was admittedly done in an attempt to
remedy the situa ton in case his first
election proved Illegal.
The relator contends in the first
place that this attempted resignation
was void and Of no effect because not
made to the proper body: that it
should have been made to the village
corporation and not to the assessors
1t is true that in the absence of a
controlling statute resignation in
order to be effective must be made to
and accepted by competent authority
If the Office is appointive the resig-
nation shout he made 20 and accept
ed by the appointing power as was
held in Dostie V Mayor and Aldermen
of Lewiston, ia Maine. g. But if
the office is elective. the resignation
NAV he made to the tribunal author
lied to call an election to fill the va
cancy. Such is the common practice
and doubtless the remaining assessors
were authorized to call a meeting of
the Fairfield Village Corporation to
elect another to fill the office. The
resignation as rendered and accepted
I hold to he legal and binding. and
therefore Mr. Nye thereby ceased to
he a member of the Board of AS
SCISSORS of the Village Corporation.
But the relator claims in the sec
ond place that even if this were true,
his immediate election as a trustee
by the two remaining assessors was
void. because the elements of per-
sonal influence and close association
still continued and an election under
such circumstances violates public
policy in the same manner as il he
had not resigned and was still
member.
If this is true it would be difficult
to draw the line and determine at
what subsequent date. if ever,
previous member of an appointing
board could be eligible to an office
within the gift of the board if a ma
iority of his former associates con-
tinue mep1bers thereof cannot
accede to this proposition The re-
Iator makes no other contention in
relation to the legality of this second
appointment.
After careful consideration of all
the points raised in this case my con-
clusion is as follows:
An information in the nature of
quo warranto brought at the relation