Alford v. Hicks

• Decision Date: 31 January 1905
• Citation: 38 So. 752,142 Ala. 355
• Parties: ALFORD ET AL. v. HICKS.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

38 So. 752

142 Ala. 355

ALFORD ET AL. v. HICKS.

Supreme Court of Alabama

January 31, 1905

Appeal from Chancery Court, Mobile County; Thomas H. Smith Chancellor.

Suit by Nathaniel M. Hicks against Jules E. Alford and others. From a decree overruling demurrers to the bill, defendants appeal. Affirmed.

The bill in this case was filed by appellee, as a resident citizen and taxpayer of Mobile county, Ala., to enjoin the paying out by the county treasurer of moneys for stationery books, and supplies for the inferior civil court of Mobile county, and to enjoin the payment out of the county treasury of the salaries provided for in said act to be paid to the sheriff, to the judge, and to the ex officio clerk of the said court. The bill also shows that the appellee is a duly elected and qualified justice of the peace of Ward 1 of Mobile city, Ala.; that as a result of the approval of the act published in the Local Acts of 1903 to establish an inferior civil court in Mobile county in lieu of justices of the peace in the city of Mobile, and the assumption of power thereunder by the acting officers of said court, the appellee has lost all his business as justice of the peace of said Ward 1, to his inestimable and irreparable damage. The act as enacted contained in detail the provisions, the substance of which was set out in the notice, with the exception that in the act as passed by the Legislature the jurisdiction of the inferior court was limited to $100, and not to $200 as stated in the notice. The grounds upon which it was averred in the bill that the act in question was unconstitutional were that the notice which was given of the intention to introduce such bill was not sufficient notice as required by section 106 of the Constitution of 1901; that the journal of the House of Representatives and the journal of the Senate of the Legislature do not show affirmatively that said act was passed in accordance with the provisions of section 106 of the Constitution of 1901. The defendants demurred to the bill upon the following grounds: "(1) Because the act of the Legislature alleged in said bill to be invalid is shown by the journals of the House and Senate of the Legislature of Alabama to have been passed in strict compliance with the Constitution of the state of Alabama. (2) Because the notices of the purpose to introduce the said act, alleged in said bill to be invalid, as set out in the journals of the House and Senate of the Legislature of Alabama, show that due publication was made, and that the notice required by the Constitution states the substance of said act, as the same was passed by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Legislature of Alabama. (3) Because that part of said act complained of in said bill which establishes an inferior civil court for the county of Mobile in lieu of justices of the peace was adopted in strict compliance with the Constitution of the state of Alabama, and is separable from all other parts and provisions of said act." Upon the submission of the cause upon the demurrers, the chancellor rendered a decree overruling the demurrers. From this decree the defendants appeal, and assign the rendition thereof as error.

Gregory L. and H. T. Smith, for appellants.

Charles L. Bromberg and Massey Wilson, for appellee.

TYSON J.

The bill in this cause assails the constitutionality of the act entitled "An act to establish an inferior civil court of Mobile county in lieu of justices of the peace in the city of Mobile." Loc. Acts 1903, p. 348, No. 265.

It is practically admitted by the appellants, who were the respondents in the court below, that the act is a local one. The main question presented is whether the notice that was given as required by section 106 of the Constitution was sufficient. That notice reads as follows: "Notice is hereby given that a bill to establish an inferior civil court for the county of Mobile, with inferior jurisdiction, in lieu of the justices of the peace, except said court shall have jurisdiction to the extent of two hundred dollars, will be introduced at the present session of the Legislature, making the judge and clerk of the inferior criminal court of Mobile county ex officio judge and clerk of said inferior civil court of Mobile county, and providing appropriate compensation for said officers. All of the costs and fees collected in said court, except the sheriff's fees, to be turned into the county treasury." Section 168 of the Constitution, authorizing the General Assembly to provide for inferior courts in lieu of justices of the peace, reads as follows: "In each precinct not lying within or partly within, any city or incorporated town of more than fifteen hundred inhabitants, there shall be elected by the qualified electors of such precinct, not exceeding two justices of the peace and one constable. Where one or more precincts lie within or partly within a city or incorporated...