Brown v. Stewart
| Decision Date | 08 March 1904 |
| Parties | BROWN et al. v. STEWART, Mayor, et al. |
| Court | North Carolina Supreme Court |
Appeal from Superior Court, Beaufort County; Hoke, Judge.
Controversy between George H. Brown and others and E. T. Stewart, as mayor of the town of Washington, and others, submitted without action, pursuant to Code, § 567. From a judgment for plaintiffs, defendants appeal. Affirmed.
This is a controversy submitted to the court without action, pursuant to section 567 of the Code. The facts upon which the parties desire the decision of the court are set forth with care and clearness. The affidavit is in strict conformity with the statute. The plaintiffs are creditors of the defendant the city of Washington, and hold the bonds and other evidences of indebtedness referred to in the act of the General Assembly . Said bonds, etc., were issued for money borrowed for necessary expenses incurred in repairing streets, public buildings, etc. It is admitted that said bonds, etc., constitute valid and binding obligations of said city. The General Assembly, at its session of 1903 enacted chapter 48, p. 92, of the Private Laws of 1903; said act being ratified February 9th. The said act recites that the city is indebted in the sum of $32,000, said debt being contracted for the purposes therein set forth, and evidenced as aforesaid, and is entitled "An act to authorize the board of commissioners of the town of Washington, North Carolina, to issue bonds to pay its existing indebtedness." The board of commissioners of said town are by said act authorized to issue bonds to the amount of $32,000, bearing interest at the rate of 5 per cent., and payable semiannually. The denomination of the bonds, the mode of authentication, and manner of sale, etc., are fully set forth therein. It is provided that the proceeds of the said bonds shall be applied exclusively to the payment of the aforesaid indebtedness. Section 2, p. 93, of the act, provides that "the principal of all said bonds shall be due and payable on the first day of May 1933, but it shall be the duty of the board of commissioners of said town to pay two thousand dollars of the principal of said entire bond issued on the first day of May 1918, and two thousand dollars on the first day of May of each year thereafter until the entire principal of each bond is paid." Provision is made for selecting by lot the bonds to be paid at the end of each year. By section 4 it is provided that the board of commissioners shall levy an annual special tax, sufficient to pay the interest on said bonds and ""shall also levy during the year 1917 and each year thereafter, a special tax to produce an annual sum sufficient to pay and discharge two thousand dollars of the principal of said bond as each installment falls due under the provision of this act." Said act was passed in strict conformity to the provisions of article 2, § 14, of the Constitution. The General Assembly at the same session enacted chapter 170, p. 355, of the Private Laws of 1903 being entitled "An Act to incorporate the city of Washington." Said act was introduced into the House of Representatives and read on three several days, passing its several readings. Upon each reading the yeas and nays were called and entered on the journal in strict accordance with section 14, art. 2, of the Constitution. The bill, after having passed the House, was sent to the Senate, duly read and passed upon its first reading without amendment. On a subsequent day, sections 84, 85, and 86 were offered as an amendment, adopted by the Senate, and made a part of the bill. After being so amended, the bill passed upon its second and third readings, upon two several days, upon a call of the yeas and nays, recorded on the journal in accordance with the constitutional requirement. Section 85 of chapter 170, p 388, Priv. Laws 1903, is as follows: The said bill, after being passed by the Senate as aforesaid, was returned to the House. The Senate amendment was concurred in, and the bill as amended duly read and passed on two several days; the yeas and nays being taken and recorded in accordance with the Constitution. Section 14, art. 2. Both of said acts were duly enrolled, ratified, and published by the Secretary of State as provided by law. It is admitted that the indebtedness for the payment of which said bonds were directed to be issued is past due and unpaid. The defendants duly advertised said bonds for sale in accordance with ...
To continue reading
Request your trial