Elliott v. Heyward
| Citation | 121 S.E. 257,127 S.C. 468 |
| Decision Date | 02 February 1924 |
| Docket Number | 11410. |
| Parties | ELLIOTT ET AL. v. HEYWARD ET AL. |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
Original petition for injunction by T. K. Elliott and another against B. H. Heyward and others, as Highway Commissioners for Fairfield County, and another. Petition refused.
Petitioners' contention was that, if the county was permitted to issue the bonds in question, the proportionate part of the bond issue chargeable to a certain town in the county would, when added to the existing bonded indebtedness of the town, raise the bonded indebtedness of the town above the 15 per cent. limitation prescribed by Const. art. 10, § 5.
Horace Traylor, of Winnsboro, for petitioners.
W. D. Douglas, G. W. Ragsdale, and J. W. Hanahan, all of Winnsboro, for respondents.
This is in the original jurisdiction, and is a petition for injunction, on a rule issued by the Chief Justice.
The facts are undisputed. The sole question is whether the proposed issue of bonds by Fairfield county violates article 10, section 5, of the Constitution of 1895. We are of the opinion that it does not. It was never contemplated, and is not a fair construction of this section to say, that a county cannot issue and sell bonds up to 8 per cent. of the total assessed value of all the property in the county.
The county is a unit, and is entitled to go to the limit of 8 per cent. in issuing and selling bonds. The bonded indebtedness of a county is indivisible. It is upon the entire county, and in the hands of the holders of the bonds the payment is enforceable against the entire county, as a whole and as a unity, and the bondholders cannot be required to resort to a subdivision of the whole for a payment of a proportionate share of the bonds.
The petition is refused.
GARY, C.J., did not participate.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ashmore v. Greater Greenville Sewer Dist.
... ... president of the Exchange Club, Robert R. Scales, Jr., the ... president of the Chamber of Commerce for the City of ... Greenville, G. Heyward Mahon, Jr., and the member of the ... Greenville County Delegation elected by said Delegation, ... Charles Verner, and the successor of any or all ... not to have been applied to the issuance of bonds by the ... subdivisions there involved, respectively. They are: ... Elliott v. Heyward, 127 S.C. 468, 121 S.E. 257, a ... county; Banks v. School District, 129 S.C. 218, 123 ... S.E. 834, a school district; Bagnal v ... ...
-
Bagnall v. Clarendon & Orangeburg Bridge Dist.
...a rate of taxation forbidden by the Constitution. The lesser cannot control the greater to this extent. See the case of Elliott v. Heyward, 127 S.C. 468, 121 S.E. 257, where the precise point is The petition for injunction is dismissed. WATTS, FRASER, and MARION, JJ., concur. GARY, C.J., an......