Opinion

State Ex Rel. Attorney-General v. Knight

  • 169 N.C. 333
  • 85 S.E. 418
  • 1915 N.C. LEXIS 220
Court
Supreme Court of North Carolina
Filed
May 24, 1915
Status
Published
Author
BbowN
On the bench
Allen, Clark, Bbown
Cited by
34 cases

“When the constitutionality of an act of the General Assembly is questioned, the courts place the act by the side of the Constitution, with the purpose and the desire to uphold it if it can be reasonably done, but under the obligation, if there is an irreconcilable conflict, to sustain the will of the people as expressed in the Constitution, and not the will of the legislators, who are but agents of the people.”

How later courts described this case

  • “When the constitutionality of an act of the General Assembly is questioned, the courts place the act by the side of the Constitution, with the purpose and the desire to uphold it if it can be reasonably done, but under the obligation, if there is an irreconcilable conflict, to sustain the will of the people as expressed in the Constitution, and not the will of the legislators, who are but agents of the people.”
  • Women could not vote, therefore not eligible to elective office

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

BbowN, J.,

dissenting: I concur in tbe opinion of tbe Court except as to tbe conclusion tbat tbe position of notary public is a public office. Therefore, I bold tbat a woman may well fill such place.

While I think tbe weight of authority is tbat it is a public office, there is some decided conflict of opinion upon tbe subject, and as I think it is a position a woman may well fill, I do not agree to tbe judgment rendered.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.