City Council v. Fowler

Citations

• 48 S.C. 8
• 25 S.E. 900
• 1896 S.C. LEXIS 149

Syllabus

<p>1. Charter oe City oe Anderson — Appeal—19 Stat. , 950 — 20 Stat. , 103. — The act of 1887 (19 Stat., 950,) and of 1888 (20 Stat., 103), amending the charter of the city of Anderson, by which no appeal is provided from the decisions of the mayor or of the city council to a superior court, are in violation of sec. 24 of art. 4 of the Con. of 1868, and, therefore, void.</p> <p>2. Trial by Jury — Municipal Charter. — A municipal charter is not unconstitutional because it does not provide a trial by jury for offenders against its ordinances.</p> <p>3. Alderman — Juror—Jury.—Aldermen of a city are not disqualified to sit as a jury in hearing an appeal from the mayor to the city council, as provided by its charter.</p> <p>4. Alderman — Juror—Mayor—Case Distinguished. — An alderman who, acting as mayor pro lem., convicted a party of violating a city ordinance, is not competent to sit as a juror with the council in hearing an appeal from such decision to the full council. Slate v. Williams, 31 S. C., 338, distinguished.</p> <p>5. Juror — Jury—Presumption.—When a person acts as a juror, the presumption is he did his duty, and voted on all questions coming before the jury.</p> <p>6. Trial Before City Council oe Anderson. — Under the charter of the city of Anderson, when a defendant appeals from the decision of the mayor to the full council, the hearing must be de novo.</p>