Hudson v. The Mayor

• Citation: 64 Ga. 287
• Parties: Hudson et al. v. The Mayor, etc., of Marietta.
• Decision Date: 30 September 1879
• Court: Supreme Court of Georgia

64 Ga. 287

Hudson et al. v. The Mayor, etc., of Marietta.

Supreme Court of the State of Georgia

(September Term, 1879.)

[Warner, Chief Justice, being engaged as presiding officer of the senate during an impeachment trial, was not present at the argument of this case.]

Constitutional law. Municipal corporations. Injunction. Before Judge Lester. Cobb County. At Chambers. May 7, 1879.

Certain citizens of Marietta, Hudson et al., filed their bill against the municipal authorities to restrain them from incurring any debt in exchanging a hand fire-engine for a steam one. It was alleged that the council had discussed the question of making an exchange, and had passed a resolution calling an election for the purpose of dissenting to the same; that the ballots were marked "exchange" and "no exchange, " and that two-thirds of the votes cast were in favor of an exchange; that in making such exchange the city will incur a debt of $3,000.-00. Various grounds of illegality in the election were alleged, but are not material here.

In regard to the answer, it need only be stated that it admitted the necessity for incurring a debt of $3,000.00, but denied that it would impose any new burden of taxation on the citizens, as it could be met without a resort to such means.

Affidavits were read in support of the bill and answer. The chancellor refused the injunction, and complainants excepted.

W. P. McClatchy, for plaintiff in error.

W. T. & W. J. Winn; George F. Cober, for defendant.

*JACKSON, Justice.

The sole question in this case is, can the city of Marietta, since the adoption of the constitution of 1877, make a new debt except as provided for in that constitution? We think not, under the plain provisions of that fundamental law.

In the 7th section of the 7th article of the constitution of 1877, these words appear: "and no such county, municipality, or division, shall incur any new debt, except for a temporary loan or loans to supply casual deficiencies of revenue, not to exceed one-fifth of one per centum of the assessed value of the taxable property therein, without the assent of two-thirds of the qualified voters thereof at an election for that purpose to be held as maybe prescribed by law; but any city, the debt of which does not exceed seven per cent. of the assessed value of the taxable property at the time of the adoption of this constitution, may be authorized by law to increase, at any time, the amount of said debt three per centum upon such assessed valuation."...