3 S.W. 844 (Mo. 1887), State ex rel. Cramer v. Hager
|Citation:||3 S.W. 844, 91 Mo. 452|
|Opinion Judge:||Sherwood, J.|
|Party Name:||The State ex rel. Cramer, Prosecuting Attorney, v. Hager et al., Judges of the County Court, et al., Appellants|
|Attorney:||R. B. Oliver for appellants. Maurice Cramer, Prosecuting Attorney, D. L. Hawkins and Wilson Cramer for respondent.|
|Judge Panel:||Sherwood, J. Norton, C. J., absent.|
|Case Date:||March 21, 1887|
|Court:||Supreme Court of Missouri|
Appeal from Cape Girardeau Circuit Court. -- Hon. J. D. Foster, Judge.
(1) The holders of said bonds having obtained judgments in the federal circuit court against the municipal authorities of Cape Girardeau county, on coupons detached from said bonds, the state circuit court will not be allowed, by injunction, to paralyze the process of said federal courts, issued in aid of, and to give effect to, said judgments. High's Extra. Leg. Rem., sec. 395, p. 281; Mayo v. Lord, 9 Wall. 575; High on Injunction, sec. 158, p. 96; McKin v. Voorhis, 7 Cranch, 279; State ex rel. Wilson v. Rainey, 74 Mo. 229. (2) Nor does it make any difference that this court, in the case of Ranney v. Bader, 67 Mo. 476, held that these identical bonds were illegal and void. In the case of State ex rel. Wilson v. Rainey, supra, this court, in effect, said: That when a county court, acting in obedience to a mandate from the federal court, directing a county court to levy a tax for the purpose of paying a judgment of the federal court against a county, the courts of this state will not interfere to prevent the collection of such tax. State ex rel. Wilson v. Rainey, 74 Mo. 229. (3) Section 2, of the act of 1868, provides that the county court "shall levy, and cause to be collected, in the same manner as county taxes, a special tax," to pay the interest and principal of such bonds. Now, the subsequent act of the legislature, as embraced in section 6799, of the Revised Statutes of Missouri, is an attempt on the part of the legislature to destroy and annul the power of the county court to levy and cause to be collected the special tax authorized by the law under which the bonds were issued. Such an act would be, as to the holders of these bonds, unconstitutional and void. Murray v. Charleston, 96 U.S. 432; Van Hoffman v. City of Quincy, 4 Wall. 535; Butz v. City of Muscatine, 8 Wall. 575; High's Extra. Leg. Rem., sec. 395, p. 282; Laws of Mo., 1868, p. 93, sec. 2; R. S., sec. 6799.
(1) The failure of the county court to follow the requirements of section 6799, of the Revised...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP