Horsefall v. School Dist., City of Salem

• Decision Date: 02 May 1910
• Citation: 143 Mo. App. 541,128 S.W. 33
• Parties: HORSEFALL et al. v. SCHOOL DIST., CITY OF SALEM.
• Court: Missouri Court of Appeals

128 S.W. 33

143 Mo. App. 541

HORSEFALL et al. v. SCHOOL DIST., CITY OF SALEM.

Springfield Court of Appeals. Missouri.

May 2, 1910.

1. SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS (§ 110)— BONDS—APPLICATION.

Where the board of directors of a school district were authorized, at an election duly called for the purpose, to issue bonds to erect a high school building, the board could not use any part of the proceeds of the bonds to purchase a site, or to pay an existing indebtedness, or for any purpose, except for the erection of a high school building.

2. SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS (§ 97)— ELECTIONS—STATUTES.

The law governing elections for state and county officers under the Australian ballot system, which expressly excepts from its operation school elections, does not require that a school district election on the question of the issuance of bonds shall be held under the Australian system.

3. ELECTIONS (§ 227) — STATUTES — COMPLIANCE.

Where a statute expressly declares any particular act to be essential to the validity of an election, the act must be performed in the manner provided, or the election is void; but where the statute merely provides that certain things shall be done, and does not prescribe what results shall follow where those things are not done, the statute is directory merely, and the final test as to the legality of an election is whether the voters were given an opportunity to express, and fairly expressed their will.

4. ELECTIONS (§ 186)—BALLOTS—STATUTES.

Where a statute provides specifically that a ballot not in a prescribed form shall not be counted, the statute is mandatory and must be enforced; but where the statute merely provides that certain things shall be done, and does not prescribe what results shall follow if they are not done, the statute is directory merely, and the test as to the legality of a ballot is whether or not the voters were given an opportunity to express, and fairly expressed their will.

5. SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS (§ 97)— ISSUANCE OF BONDS—ELECTIONS—VALIDITY.

Where the order of the board of directors of a school district calling an election to determine the question of the issuance of bonds for a high school building, and the notice of election, were regular so far as they related to the bond issue, and where the voters fairly expressed themselves and gave a substantial majority for the bonds, and there was no charge of fraud nor pretense that the election was not fair, the election should be upheld.

6. SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS (§ 97)— SCHOOL BUILDINGS—RIGHT TO ERECT.

Where the building which a school district owned would be sufficient for the accommodation of the lower grades, if provision were made elsewhere for the high school grades, the board of directors of the district could call an election to determine the question of issuing bonds to erect a high school building.

Error to Circuit Court, Dent County; L. B. Woodside, Judge.

Action by J. H. Horsefall and others against the School District, City of Salem. There was a judgment for defendant, and plaintiffs bring error. Affirmed.

A. J. Arthur and Lamar & Lamar, for plaintiffs in error. Wm. P. Elmer, for defendant in error.

COX, J.

Action by injunction to restrain defendants, who are the board of directors of the school district of Salem, from issuing bonds of the district in the sum of $25,000. A temporary writ was issued, and, on trial, this was dissolved and the issues found for defendants. Plaintiffs bring the case here by writ of error.

A special election was held in the district on May 8, 1909. There were two orders of the board calling the election, one to vote on a proposition to issue bonds of the district in the sum of $25,000 for the purpose of erecting a high school building therein. Another order of the board was made calling an election to be held on the same day to vote on two sites for the location of the high school building, one known as the "McMurtrey site," and the other as the "Douglass site." The clerk was directed to post notices as required by law for each one of these elections. The notices posted, however, as preserved in this record, apply only to the question of the loan and said nothing about site. The ballots used at the election on the question of the loan were in this form: "For the loan, Yes. For the loan, No." The result of the election as certified by the judges and clerks was that, "For the loan, Yes," had...