Carrison v. Kershaw County

Decision Date18 June 1909
Citation64 S.E. 1018,83 S.C. 88
PartiesCARRISON et al. v. KERSHAW COUNTY et al.
CourtSouth Carolina Supreme Court

Petition by H. G. Carrison and others for injunction against Kershaw County and others. Dismissed.

Lawrence T. Mills, for petitioners.

T. J Kirkland, for respondents.

JONES C.J.

The petitioners, taxpayers of Kershaw county, have applied in the original jurisdiction of this court for an injunction to restrain the respondents, county commissioners of Kershaw county, from issuing coupon bonds of said county to the amount of $40,000 under an act of the Legislature approved February 23, 1909 (26 St. at Large, p. 298). The question presented by the petition and return is whether the county commissioners have authority to issue said bonds without submitting the question of such issuance to an election.

The title of the act is as follows: "An act to authorize the county commissioners of Kershaw to construct a bridge across the Wateree river, to provide funds therefor and to issue the obligation of said county for such purpose and to create a sinking fund for the retirement or payment of such obligation." The third section of the act relevant to the issue provides as follows: "Sec. 3. That in order to raise funds requisite for the construction of such bridge and the other purposes appertaining thereto aforesaid, the said county commissioners are also hereby authorized and empowered to borrow money upon the promissory notes of Kershaw county, or to issue and sell the coupon bonds of said county to an aggregate amount not exceeding forty thousand ($40,000) dollars. Any such notes or bonds shall be in denomination not exceeding one thousand ($1,000) dollars each; to bear interest from date thereof at a rate not exceeding six (6) per cent., and to run for a period not exceeding twenty-five (25) years, interest to be payable annually or semiannually. Any such notes or bonds and coupons shall be signed by the county supervisor for Kershaw county Provided, that the signature of the supervisor to coupons may be lithographed or engraved in fac simile: Provided, that in the event the said county board of commissioners shall decide to issue coupon or registered bonds, they shall have full power and authority to submit the question of issuing said bonds to the qualified voters of the county, said election to be governed by the provisions of law now applicable to such election: Provided, further, that...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Chesterfield County v. State Highway Dept. of South Carolina
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • July 7, 1939
    ... ... There ... is no provision of the Constitution requiring an issue of ... bonds by a county to be submitted to a vote of the people ... Carrison v. Kershaw County, 83 S.C. 88, 64 S.E ... 1018; Lillard v. Melton, 103 S.C. 10, 87 S.E. 421; ... Graham v. Ervin, 114 S.C. 419, 103 S.E. 750 ... ...
  • Lillard v. Melton
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • December 17, 1915
    ... ... John W. Lillard against W. D. Melton, Chairman, and others, ... as the Richland County Commission for Permanent Highways ... From a judgment for defendants, plaintiff appeals ... prescribed by the Constitution ...          (4) ... Whether the case of Carrison v. Kershaw, 83 S.C. 88, ... 64 S.E. 1018, should not be overruled, on the ground that it ... is ... ...
  • Powell v. Hargrove
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • August 16, 1926
    ... ...          Appeal ... from Common Pleas Circuit Court of Dillon County; E. C ... Dennis, Judge ...          Suit ... for injunction by E. L. Powell and ... vested in that branch of our government. Carrison v ... Kershaw County, 83 S.C. 88, 64 S.E. 1018; Arnette v ... Ford, supra; Lillard v. Melton, ... ...
  • Massey v. Glenn
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • October 14, 1916
    ... ... the holding of an election upon the question of establishing ... the proposed new county of Catawba ...          In ... order to expedite the final decision in the case, this ... 42 S.C. 223, 20 S.E. 221, 26 L. R. A. 345; and the principle ... is recognized in Carrison v. Kershaw, 83 S.C. 88, 64 ... S.E. 1018, and Lillard v. Melton, 103 S.C. 10, 87 ... S.E. 421, ... ...
  • 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