Board of Sup'rs of forrest County v. Clark, 29933

CourtMississippi Supreme Court
Writing for the CourtAnderson, J.
Citation163 Miss. 120,140 So. 733
Decision Date11 April 1932
Docket Number29933
PartiesBOARD OF SUP'RS OF FORREST COUNTY v. CLARK et al

140 So. 733

163 Miss. 120

BOARD OF SUP'RS OF FORREST COUNTY
v.

CLARK et al

No. 29933

Supreme Court of Mississippi

April 11, 1932


Division B

1. SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS. Petition for bond issue of consolidated school district and notice of election thereon, stating purpose to include "furnishing... necessary school supplies," held to render bonds illegal (Code 1930, section 6643).

Petition for bond issue of consolidated school district, and notice of election thereon, stated purposes of bond issue to be for "rebuilding, remodelling and repairing the present school building and teachers' home,... and for the purpose of equipping [163 Miss. 121] said school building and furnishing same with all necessary school supplies." Code 1930, section 6643, in substance, authorizes bond issue to "erect, repair, and equip school buildings, teachers' home, school barns, transportation vehicles, and for purchasing lands for schools...."

2. SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS.

Proceedings for issuance of bonds of consolidated school district should clearly show purposes, and with such certainty that issuance will be wholly within statutory power (Code 1930, section 6643).

3. SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS.

Notice of election on bond issue for consolidated school district must accurately state purpose thereof (Code 1930, section 6643).

HON. W. J. PACK, Judge.

APPEAL from circuit court of Forrest county, HON. W. J. PACK, Judge.

Proceedings before the board of supervisors of Forrest county for the issuance of bonds for the Eatonville Consolidated School District. From certain orders and resolutions entered by the Board of Supervisors, A. O. Clark and others, taxpayers and patrons, appealed to the circuit court. From a judgment of the circuit court holding the bonds invalid, the Board of Supervisors appeals. Affirmed.

Affirmed.

Geo. W. and E. J. Currie and C. E. Hill, all of Hattiesburg, for appellant.

The statute authorizes issuance of bonds "to erect, repair and equip school buildings, teachers' homes, school barns, transportation vehicles, and for purchasing lands for schools." Such statutes are in the interest of public improvements, and should be liberally construed.

Thomason v. Court of County Commissioners, 63 So. 87.

The language of the petition, and particularly the language of the order of the Board of Supervisors, demonstrate the practical purpose involved, and the adding of [163 Miss. 122] the clause "and furnishing same with all necessary school supplies" is either harmless surplusage or it is included in the description of the word "equipment." If the word "equipment" is intended to mean some stable or permanent utility, the context shows that the word "furnishing" is used in the same sense.

The filing of any petition is not jurisdictional, but even if it is jurisdictional, the duty to order the election imposed by the filing of the petition may contain unnecessary recital, nor is the power conferred by it lost by reason of the fact that the Board in ordering the election submits only a part of the questions named therein.

15 Corpus Juris, page 617, section 328.

In submitting a proposed county bond issue to the voters, it is sufficient if there is a substantial compliance with statutory requirements as to the making of the order and the contents of the order and ballot; and if the required statements are made in general terms, without going into details. An unnecessary statement of certain matters in a proposition submitted to the voters will not invalidate, where the submission is otherwise sufficient.

15 Corpus Juris, 618, 619, section 329.

The courts generally adopt a liberal construction in dealing with statutory requirements respecting petitions and notices for elections for public betterments, and hold that a substantial compliance is sufficient, especially where there is nothing to indicate that the result of the election would have been different had the notice been in strict compliance with statutory requirements.

15 Corpus Juris, pages 619-620, section 330.

The phrase "constructing public roads" is used in our statute in its most comprehensive sense, and it does not mean merely the building of roads not before having existence, but it means the maintenance and betterment of roads already in existence, thus demonstrating that the court adopts a liberal construction of stautes intended for public improvement. [163 Miss. 123]

54 So. 307.

The issuance of the bonds is one thing, and the spending of the money derived therefrom is another and different matter altogether.

Keaton v. Board of Supervisors of Clarke County, 77 So. 906.

The phrase "furnishing the same with all necessary school supplies" is surplusage.

Board of Supervisors of De Soto County v. Dean, 82 So. 257; Welborn v. Board of Supervisors of Jones County, 94 So. 224.

The word "equipment" usually means whatever is used in equipping, and it is generally applied to movable, and not immovable property, and it unmistakably shows that the use of the words "furnishing" and "supplies" is in strict accord with the statutory meaning of the word "equipment."

Y. D. Lumber Company v. Refuge Cotton Oil Co., 120 So. 447.

The word "supplies" is to be construed in the light of the circumstances of each particular case.

Wright v. Walton, 56 Miss. 1.

John R. Tally, of Hattiesburg, for appellees.

The use of the conjunction "and," immediately preceding the phrase in question, indicates the purpose, in addition to the purpose immediately preceding; that is, equipping the school building and by the use of the word "all," further indicates that it does not refer merely to that character of supplies which would form a part of the permanent equipment, but embraces all supplies which are necessary.

Disinfectants for courthouses and jails fall within the terms "supplies for public buildings."

American Disinfecting Company v. Oktibbeha County, 110 So. 869.

[163 Miss. 124] For a definition of "equipment" as distinguished from materials, see McElrath & Rogers v. W. G. Kimmons & Sons, 146 Miss. 775, 112 So. 165; Standard Oil Company v. National Surety Co., 143 Miss. 841, 107 So. 559; United States Fidelity & Guaranty Company v. Yazoo County, 110 So. 780.

"Equipping" providing that vessels running on any navigable waters of the state shall be liable for all debts contracted by the owners in equipping such boats or vessels, did not mean such articles as might be daily consumed and constantly replaced, but such as went towards the building, repairing, fitting or equipping the vessel."

3 Words & Phrases,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 practice notes
  • Keeton v. State, 31931
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • April 6, 1936
    ...written statements obtained from the defendant by the prosecution, touching her guilt or innocence of the crime charged. Eaton v. State, 140 So. 733; Sprinkle v. State, 137 Miss. 731, 102 So. 844; State v. Tippett, 296 S.W. 132; U. S. v. Rich, 6 Alaska, 670; People v. Gerold, 265 Ill. 448, ......
  • Rawlings v. Ladner, 32058
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • February 3, 1936
    ...Miss. 645, 150 So. 218, 151 So. 761; Monroe County v. Minto, 127 Miss. 702, 90 So. 443; Board of Supervisors of Forrest County v. Clark, 163 Miss. 120, 140 So. 733; City of Jackson v. Williams, 92 Miss. 301, 46 So. 551; Langstaff v. Town of Durant, 111 Miss. 918, 72 So. 236, 681; Langstaff ......
  • Garraway v. State ex rel. Dale, 33527
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • January 23, 1939
    ...submit that Mr. Garraway took his appeal in strict compliance with Sections 78, 79, 80 and 2323, Code of 1930. Forrest County v. Clark, 163 Miss. 120, 140 So. 733. We submit that the statute is not subject to construction. It is plain and unambiguous. It simply says that the taxpayer has th......
  • St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Loving, 29920
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • April 11, 1932
    ...Agricultural Ins. Co. v. Anderson, 120 Miss. 278, 82 So. 146; Lamar Life Ins. Co. v. Kemp, 154 Miss. 890, 124 So. 62; Hartford Fire Ins. [163 Miss. 120] Co. v. Clark, 154 Miss. 418, 122 So. 551; Interstate Life & Accident Ins. Co. v. Ruble, 160 Miss. 206, 133 So. 223. Where such an agent of......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
8 cases
  • Keeton v. State, 31931
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • April 6, 1936
    ...written statements obtained from the defendant by the prosecution, touching her guilt or innocence of the crime charged. Eaton v. State, 140 So. 733; Sprinkle v. State, 137 Miss. 731, 102 So. 844; State v. Tippett, 296 S.W. 132; U. S. v. Rich, 6 Alaska, 670; People v. Gerold, 265 Ill. 448, ......
  • Rawlings v. Ladner, 32058
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Mississippi
    • February 3, 1936
    ...Miss. 645, 150 So. 218, 151 So. 761; Monroe County v. Minto, 127 Miss. 702, 90 So. 443; Board of Supervisors of Forrest County v. Clark, 163 Miss. 120, 140 So. 733; City of Jackson v. Williams, 92 Miss. 301, 46 So. 551; Langstaff v. Town of Durant, 111 Miss. 918, 72 So. 236, 681; Langstaff ......
  • Garraway v. State ex rel. Dale, 33527
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • January 23, 1939
    ...submit that Mr. Garraway took his appeal in strict compliance with Sections 78, 79, 80 and 2323, Code of 1930. Forrest County v. Clark, 163 Miss. 120, 140 So. 733. We submit that the statute is not subject to construction. It is plain and unambiguous. It simply says that the taxpayer has th......
  • St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Loving, 29920
    • United States
    • Mississippi Supreme Court
    • April 11, 1932
    ...Agricultural Ins. Co. v. Anderson, 120 Miss. 278, 82 So. 146; Lamar Life Ins. Co. v. Kemp, 154 Miss. 890, 124 So. 62; Hartford Fire Ins. [163 Miss. 120] Co. v. Clark, 154 Miss. 418, 122 So. 551; Interstate Life & Accident Ins. Co. v. Ruble, 160 Miss. 206, 133 So. 223. Where such an agent of......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT