Majority

The state or condition of a person who has arrived at full age. He is then said to be a major, in opposition to minor, which is his condition during infancy. See Age. The greater number. More than all the opponents. Some question exists as to whether a majority of any body Is more than one-half the whole number or more than the number acting in opposition. Thus, In a body of one hundred voters. In which twenty did not vote on any partlcfllar question, on the former suppo.sitlon flfty-one would be a majority, on the latter forty-one. The Intended slguiflcatlon Is generally denoted by the context, and where it is not, the second sense is generally intended; a majority on a given question being more than onehalf the number of those voting. In every well-regulated society, the majority has always claimed and exercised the right to govern the whole society, iu the manner pointed out by the fundamental laws; and the minority are bound whether they have assented or not, for the obvious reason that opposite wills cannot prevail at the same time, in the same society, on the same subject; 1 Tuck. Bla, Com. Appx. 168; 9 Dane, Abr. 37; 1 Story, Const. § 207. As to the rights of the majority of partowners of vessels, see 3 Kent 114; Pars, Marit. Law; Pabt-Ownebs. In the absence of contract, the general rule in partnerships is that each partner has an equal voice, and a majority acting bona fide have the right to manage the partnership concern and dispose of the partnership property notwithstanding the dissent of the minority; but in every case when the minority have a right to give an opinion, they ought to be notified. See Pabtneb. As to the conflict of laws relating to majority, see Barrera v. Alpuente, 6 Mart N. In corporations. In the absence of any provision In the charter or constitution, the general rule is that, within the scope of the corporate affairs, the acts of a majority bind the corporation; Lauman v. R. Co., 30 Pa. 42, 72 Am. Dec. 685; Mowrey v. R. Co., 4 Biss. 78, Fed, Cas. No. 9,891; Eggleston v. Doolittle, 33 Conn. 390. It is not necessary that those present at a meeting constitute a majority of all the members; Ex parte Willcocks, 7 Cow. (N. Y.) 402, 17 Am. Dec. 525; a majority of those who appear may act; Craig V. First Presbyterian Church of Pittsburgh, 88 Pa. 42, 32 Am, Rep. 417; Brewer V. Proprietors of Boston Theatre, 104 Mass..378; Faulds v. Yates, 57 111.

416, 11 Am. Rep.^ 24; 33 Beav. 595.

When, however, an act is to be performed by a select and definite body, such as a board of directors, a majority of the entire body is required to constitute a meeting; Buell v. Buckingham & Co., 16 la. 284, 85 Am. Dec. 516; but if a quorum is present, a majority of such quorum may act; Edgerly v.^ Emerson, 23 N. H. 555, 55 Am. Dec. 207; Price v. R. Co., 13 Ind. 58. The minority of a committee to which a corporate power has been delegated cannot bind the majority, or do any valid act, in the absence of any special provision otherwise; Brown v. District of Columbia, 127 U. S. 679, 8 Sup> Ct. 1314, 32 L. Ed. 262. In political elections, a majority of the votes cast at an election on any question means the majority of those who voted on that question; Taylor v. Taylor, 10 Minn. 107 (Gil. 81); Holcomb v, Davis, 56 111. 414; Gillespie v. Palmer, 20 Wis. 544; Cass County V. Johnston, 95 U. S. 369, 24 L. Ed. 416. “All qualified voters who absent themselves from an election duly called are presumed to assent to the e.xpress will of the majority of those voting, unless the law providing for the election otherwise declares. Any other rule would be productive of the greatest inconvenience, and ought not to be adopted unless the legislative will to that effect is clearly expressed.’’ Id. (Miller and Bradley, JJ., dissenting); but the opposite view is held in State v. Winkelmeier, 35 Mo. 103; Bayard v. Kllnge, 16 Minn. 249 (Gil. 221); State V. Swift, 69 Ind. 505. Where an amendment to the constitution received less than a majority of all those who. voted at the election, but had a majority of the votes cast for or against the adoption of the amendment; and it was held (two judges dissenting) that the amendment had been neither ratified nor rejected. The United States House of Representatives has power to transact business when a majority of its members is present, and may prescribe any method which is reasonably certain to determine the presence of a majority; U. S. V. Bal Un, 144 U. S. 1, 12 Sup. Ot. 507, 36 L. Ed. 321. See Election; Meeting;