Case Name: Daniel T. Enyart et al. v. The Trustees of Hanover, Township
Court: Supreme Court of Ohio
Jurisdiction: Ohio
Decision Date: 1874-12
Citations: 25 Ohio St. 618
Docket Number: 
Parties: Daniel T. Enyart et al. v. The Trustees of Hanover, Township.
Judges: 
Reporter: Ohio State Reports, New Service
Volume: 25
Pages: 618–619

Head Matter:
Daniel T. Enyart et al. v. The Trustees of Hanover, Township.
Where an act of the legislature authorized the trustees of a township to. levy a special tax, with a proviso “ that said trustees shall not causa said levy to he made until a majority of the electors of said township, at some regular election, shall vote in favor of said levy,” it required a majority of all the votes cast at such regular election, and not simply a. majority of those voting for or against the levy.
Motion for leave to file petition in error to reverse the-judgment of the District Court of Licking county.
Daniel T. Enyart was elected treasurer of Hanover township, Licking county, on the 3d day of April, 1871; and on the eighth day of the same month gave bond and took the required oath. He was his own successor in the office. On the 14th day of April, 1871, his house was burglarized,, and $1,580 of the funds in his hands belonging to the township were stolen. On the 27th of April, 1872, the legislature passed an act for the relief of Enyart as township treasurer (69 Ohio L. 269), which authorized the trustees of Hanover township to levy a tax to refund to Enyart the amount of money so stolen from him, with a proviso “ that, said trustees shall not cause said levy to he made until a. majority of the electors of said township, at some regular-election, shall vote in favor of said levy.”
The question was submitted to the electors at the Presidential election, in November, 1872; at which 242 votes-were cast for electors of President and Vice-President.. There were 118 votes cast in favor of levying the tax; 99 were cast against it, and 25 of those voting for electors for President, did not vote for or against the tax. The votes-cast in favor of levying the tax were a majority of those-voting on that question, but not a majority of all the votes-cast for electors of President and Vice-President. The question presented is: Were the township trustees authorized to levy the tax ?
J. Buckingham, for the motion.
6r. Atherton and Charles II. Kebler, contra.

Opinion:
By the Court.
The trustees of Hanover township were-not authorized to levy a tax to refund to Enyart the amount' of money stolen from him, until a majority of the electors of the township, voting at some regular election, " shall vote in favor of such levy." In this case the entire number of votes cast for President and Vice-President furnished the basis by which it is to be determined whether or not the-levy was authorized. The record shows that, although the-number of votes in favor of levying the tax was a majority of the votes cast on that question, they were not a majority of all the votes cast for electors of President and Vice-President, and hence the levy was never authorized.
Motion overruled.