Lawrence County v. Meade County

• Decision Date: 09 February 1895
• Citation: Lawrence County v. Meade County, 6 SD 528, 62 NW 131 (S.D. 1895)
• Parties: LAWRENCE COUNTY v. MEADE COUNTY. [1]
• Court: South Dakota Supreme Court

62 N.W. 131

6 S.D. 528

LAWRENCE COUNTY v. MEADE COUNTY. ^[1]

Supreme Court of South Dakota

February 9, 1895

Syllabus by the Court.

1. In the construction of a statute, the particular inquiry is not what is the abstract force of the words used, or what they may comprehend, but in what sense they were intended to be used as they are found in the act.

2. General words do not always extend to every case which literally falls within them, but, when the intention can be collected from the statute itself, words may be modified altered, or supplied so as to obviate any repugnance or inconsistency with such intention.

3. L county, having an indebtedness, both bonded and floating, was by act of the territorial legislature divided, and the segregated portion erected into the county of M. The act provided that M. county should assume and pay its proper proportion of all indebtedness of L. county, fixing a rule by which such proportion should be ascertained. It further provided that M. county should issue bonds to L. county for its proportion of L. county's obligations which it was to assume, which bonds should correspond in respect to time of maturity, rate of interest, and place of payment with the obligations of L. county. Held that, as to the floating indebtedness of L. county represented by past-due warrants the provisions for the issue of bonds by M. county could not apply without involving the incongruous consequence, among others, of issuing bonds with no term to run or future time of payment, and that such provisions for issuing bonds by M county did not apply to the floating indebtedness represented by past-due warrants.

4. Held, further, that the effect of the act was to require M. county to assume its share of the floating indebtedness of L. county, and, as between itself and L. county, to make payment of the same in the usual way of paying matured indebtedness.

Appeal from circuit court, Meade county; Charles M. Thomas, Judge.

Action by the county of Lawrence against the county of Meade. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals.

Joseph B. Moore and Robert C. Hayes, for appellant. Thos. E. Harvey, for respondent.

KELLAM J.

This is an action brought by the county of Lawrence against the county of Meade upon the following facts, as stated in the complaint:

That in the year 1889 Lawrence county was by act of the territorial legislature divided, and the segregated portion erected into the county of Meade. That the legislative act so creating Meade county contained the following provisions:

"Sec. 13. The county of Meade organized under this act shall assume and pay, as hereinafter provided, a just proportion of the indebtedness of Lawrence county, from which it is segregated, based upon the assessed valuation of said Lawrence county for the year 1888, and upon the proportion that the valuation within the county of Meade bears by the said assessment of 1888 to the valuation within the whole of Lawrence county; and it is hereby made the duty of the county commissioners of both the counties of Meade and Lawrence to meet together at the county seat of Lawrence county, on the 1st day of July, 1889, and at such meeting they shall ascertain as near as may be the total outstanding indebtedness of Lawrence county on the 1st day of July, the date of the joint session provided for in this section, and from the total they shall make following deduction, to wit: (1) The amount of all sums due and payable to said Lawrence county as rents. (2) The amount of outstanding bonds given for public property owned by and remaining within the limits of the county of Lawrence. (3) The amount of public funds on hand and belonging to the county of Lawrence, on the day from which its outstanding indebtedness is ascertained by the joint board of county commissioners as provided for in this section, and not belonging to the special funds hereinafter mentioned, be the amount which the county organized under this act shall pay proportion of, in the proportion hereinbefore specified; and it shall be the duty of such commissioners to ascertain and fix the amount that Meade county shall assume and pay to Lawrence county."

"Sec. 19. The amount of indebtedness of Meade county organized under this act, as ascertained by the two boards of county commissioners, in compliance with the provisions of the preceding section, shall be paid to Lawrence county in the bonds of Meade county as hereinafter provided.

Sec. 20. Such bonds shall be dated on the 1st day of July, 1889, as provided in section 13 of this act, and shall be issued for a period corresponding with the time or terms on which the obligations of the original county became due and payable and shall be payable at the same place and shall bear the same rate of interest as the obligations of the original county, said commissioners taking care to classify the liquidating bonds, issuing a due proportion of each, in proportion to each of Lawrence county's obligations bearing different rates of interest and places of payment, and said Lawrence county shall have authority to exchange such bonds for an equal amount of obligations of its own of the same class."

"Sec. 22. The board of county commissioners of Meade county are hereby empowered and directed to issue such liquidating bonds in denominations as may be required by the county of Lawrence, not to exceed one thousand dollars ($1,000) each, and deliver the same to the county clerk of said Lawrence county, who shall receipt therefor, attaching the seal of his office to such receipts, and the county clerk of Meade county shall enter such receipts at length upon the records of the county commissioners and note the same in the bond register of his county."

The further facts, as stated in the complaint, are as follows: "Fourth. That the board of county commissioners of Meade county and the board of county commissioners of Lawrence county met in joint session at the courthouse in the city of Deadwood, in pursuance of the provisions of said section 13, for the purpose of ascertaining the total outstanding indebtedness of Lawrence county as it existed on the 1st day of July, 1889, and for the purpose of ascertaining the proportion of said indebtedness which Meade county should pay according to the provisions of said section 13. Fifth. That it was ascertained and determined and agreed to, by the boards of county commissioners of the counties of Meade and Lawrence, that the total outstanding floating indebtedness of Lawrence county, as evidenced by the warrants of said county outstanding on the 1st day of July, 1889, of which Meade county agreed to pay and should pay its proportion, was $109,442.57. Sixth. That it was ascertained and agreed by said boards of county commissioners that the proportion of the outstanding indebtedness of Lawrence county, which Meade county should assume and pay as provided in the said act creating Meade county, was 22.1122 per centum of said indebtedness. Seventh. That the amount of the outstanding floating indebtedness which Meade county should and did assume and agree to pay was $24,200.10. Eighth. That the defendant Meade county has not paid said sum, nor any part thereof, though the same has been demanded."

From these quotations from the complaint it will be seen that the action is for the recovery of Meade county's proportion of the floating indebtedness, as distinguished from its bonded indebtedness. Meade county having answered, and the case coming on for trial, defendant's counsel objected to the introduction of any evidence by plaintiff, on the ground that its complaint did not state facts constituting a cause of action. The objection was sustained, and judgment rendered against the plaintiff county, dismissing its complaint, and for costs. From this judgment Lawrence county appeals.

Whether the trial court was right or wrong in its ruling upon the objection to the complaint depends upon the interpretation to be given to the provisions of the law of 1889, with...