Harris v. Wood
| Decision Date | 11 April 1828 |
| Citation | 22 Ky. 641 |
| Parties | Harris v. Wood. |
| Court | Kentucky Court of Appeals |
Public Buildings. Towns. Constitutional Law. Trial by Jury. Revenue. Witness.
APPEAL FROM THE HART CIRCUIT; BENJAMIN MONROE, JUDGE.
Crittenden and Monroe, for appellant;
Mayes for appellee.
On the 28th of January, 1819, the legislature, by an act, erected the county of Hart, and provided for locating the site of justice, and in aid of the county levy to meet the large buildings of the new county, as the public buildings were to be erected, they inserted the following provisions in the act:
" Be it further enacted, That the clerk of the county court of said county, is hereby authorized and empowered to open subscription papers for the purpose of proposals or subscriptions in money or property, to any amount not exceeding eight thousand dollars, from any person or persons for the erecting the public buildings, and if any person or persons shall fail to make payment according to the articles of subscription, it shall be lawful for said clerk to recover the same or the amount thereof, on giving ten days previous notice to the defendant, on motion in the circuit court, or by warrant before a justice of the peace, as the case may require; and all sums so subscribed and received, or so much thereof as the county court shall deem necessary for that purpose, shall be applied by them to the erecting the public buildings, and the residue, if any, to be paid over to the person or persons subscribing the same."
Act of the legislature authorizing subscriptions for the public buildings of Hart county.
George T. Wood, the present appellee, was appointed the clerk of the county court, and in obedience to the act opened a subscription, which he presented to the firm or house of Harris and Murray, in Munfordsville, where the site of justice was about to be located, and where it was afterwards fixed. Murray, one of the partners, the other not being present at the moment, subscribed one hundred dollars in the partnership name. When the subscription was shown to the partner, Harris, though not in the presence of Murray, he changed the one hundred into two hundred dollars.
Subscription by Murray and Harris.
The county court afterwards ordered Wood to proceed to the collection of this with other sums subscribed, and not paid. Wood gave notice to these co-partners, and made his motion against them in the circuit court, who on the trial discharged Murray as not liable, but gave judgment against Harris for the amount, and he has appealed.
Motion and judgment of the circuit court.
The first question made by Harris in this court is, that the act on this point, is unconstitutional, and that the legislature could not authorize such summary proceedings to recover such a demand.
Act allowing the subscriptions for the public buildings, valid.
The origin of the right exists in the act, and it would seem that it was competent for the legislature to dictate the remedy also. We are not able to discover any constitutional provision, which forbids the...
To continue reading
Request your trial