Case Name: W. H. NICHOLS v. THE BOARD OF COUNCILMEN OF EDENTON
Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1899-10-10
Citations: 125 N.C. 13
Docket Number: 
Parties: W. H. NICHOLS v. THE BOARD OF COUNCILMEN OF EDENTON.
Judges: EaiRcloth, C. J., renders tbe opinion of tbe Court.
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 125
Pages: 13–17

Head Matter:
W. H. NICHOLS v. THE BOARD OF COUNCILMEN OF EDENTON.
(Decided October 10, 1899.)
Amendment of Town Charter — Compensation of Town Officers.
1. Amendment to a statute operates from its enactment, leaving in force tbe portions which are not altered. Code, sec. 3766.
2, The Act of 1869-’70, incorporating the town of EdentOD, piovides for its government hy a Board of Commissioners, allowing to each of them $25 per annum. The amendatory Act of 1876-’77 provides for the government of the town hy the Mayor and six Councilmen. known as “The Board of Couiu-i,-men of Edenton,” making no menu on of compensation, hut the duties, functions and powers of the Councilmen are the same as those exercised by the Board of Commissioners: Held, that the Councilmen are entitled, by right, to the same pay allowed the Commissioners.
Civil ActioN, originating in tbe Justice’s Court of ChowaN County, and carried by appeal to tbe Superior Court and beard before Bowman, J., at Spring Term, 1899, a jury trial being waived.
. Tbe plaintiff was elected, in May, 1897, one of tbe Ooun-eilmen of Edenton for a term of two years, qualified and served, and claims $37.50 for bis services — it was conceded that be was entitled to that amount, if be was entitled to any pay at all, which tbe defendant denies. Upon tbe facts found by his Honor, judgment was rendered for the plaintiff, and tbe defendant appealed.
Tbe facts found are stated in the opinion.
•Mr. 'W. M. Bond, -for defendant (appellant).
Jír. W. J. Leary, for plaintiff.
EaiRcloth, C. J., renders tbe opinion of tbe Court.
pLARK, J., renders dissenting opinion.

Opinion:
Eaieoloth,, C. J.
Action for $37.50, the salary of plaintiff as one of the Board of Oouncilmen of defendant. This amount is conceded, if plaintiff is entitled to recover. The facts .found are as follows:
By a Private Act 1869-'70, chap. 123, the defendant town was regulated and governed by a Board of Commissioners, and by sec. 37, "Each one of the Commissioners of the town of Edenton shall receive $25 per annum, and they shall be required to fix the salaries of the other town officers not otherwise provided for in this act." This charter was amended by Act 1876-'77, chap. 88, and provided that the affairs of the town should be controlled by the Mayor and six Oouncilmen, known as "The Board of Oouncilmen of Edenton", and that all laws and parts of laws in conflict with this act are repealed. The amendment makes no mention of compensation to the Oouncilmen. It is found as a fact that the duties, functions and powers of the Oouncilmen are the same as those exercised by the Board of Commissioners, and that the plaintiff was duly inducted into his office and has faithfully discharged its duties. Judgment was rendered for plaintiff and defendant appealed. The defendant's fallacy is in assuming that the Act of 1869-'70, chap. 123, was repealed, by the Act of 1876-'77, chap. 88. The latter does not purport to repeal the former, but expressly to amend it. In such cases the unrepealed parts remain in force as if re-enacted. Code, sec. 3766.
It follows that the officer performing the duties, etc., of the Commissioners, by whatever name known, is entitled to the benefits of sec. 37 of the original act. This is his right and the Board of Oouncilmen are powerless to divest him of it by any resolution.
Affirmed.