Morris County Com'rs v. Hinchman

Decision Date01 April 1884
Citation31 Kan. 729,3 P. 504
PartiesTHE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF MORRIS COUNTY, et al., v. ANDREW W. HINCHMAN
CourtKansas Supreme Court

[Copyrighted Material Omitted] [Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Error from Morris District Court.

ACTION brought on December 19, 1882, by Andrew W. Hinchman against The Board of Commissioners of the County of Morris; A. Moser Jr., clerk, and W. H. White, treasurer of said county Council Grove township, in Morris county, and J. J. Jones, trustee thereof, to enjoin and restrain the defendants and their successors in office from levying and collecting or attempting to levy and collect any tax upon the real estate of the plaintiff in Valley township, in said county, to pay the interest and provide a sinking fund upon certain bonds issued by Council Grove township, March 1, 1873; also, for a judgment and decree declaring that said bonds were void as to the plaintiff, and not a lien on his property. A temporary order of injunction was obtained on December 19, 1881, restraining and enjoining the defendants from making said levy or collecting said tax; on January 25, 1882, an amended petition was filed by the plaintiff, setting forth additional and supplemental averments; on April 26, 1882, Council Grove township, and J. J. Jones, as trustee, filed a cross-petition and answer to the amended petition; on May 4, 1882, the plaintiff filed a reply to the cross-bill and answer; on April 20, 1883, the board of commissioners of Morris county filed a disclaimer to the petition.

Trial at the April Term, 1883. The court, from the admissions of the parties, the allegations of the pleadings, and the evidence, found the following facts, viz.:

"1. Said Morris county was duly organized prior to the year 1860.

"2. On March 17, 1860, the board of county commissioners of said county duly organized and formed said Council Grove township, embracing the following lands and none other, viz.: 'Council Grove township shall be composed of townships Nos. 16 and 17 S., of ranges 7 and 8 E., and parts of townships Nos. 16 and 17 S., of range No. 9 E.; and bounded as follows: On the south and east by the county line; on the north by a line dividing townships Nos. 15 and 16 S.; and on the west by the range line dividing ranges Nos. 6 and 7, east of the sixth principal meridian.'

"3. At the time mentioned in finding No. 2, March 17, 1860, a two-mile strip containing sections 1, 2, 11, 12, 13, 14, 23, 24, 25, 26, 35, and 36, in townships 16 and 17 S., of range 9 E., were a part of Breckinridge (now Lyon) county, and that thereafter, by chapter 22, Laws of 1864, the two-mile strip above described was taken from said Breckinridge county and added to said Morris county.

"4. Said board of county commissioners made no formal change in the east boundary line of said Council Grove township by any resolution or order defining boundaries, from March 17, 1860, until April 15, 1874, when they formed and organized Valley township, a proper description of which is set out as 'Exhibit A' to plaintiff's petition. But as an assumed modification of this finding the defendant showed the following proceedings, of record in the office of said county clerk, as the action of' the board of county commissioners at a meeting duly held January 13, 1874.

"The following petition of Wm. H. Martin, Wm. H. Hubbard, Patrick O'Donnell, and thirty-four others, was taken up:

'To the Hon. Board of County Commissioners of Morris County, Kan.: We, the undersigned citizens and legal voters of Morris county, residents within the following-described territory, most respectfully petition and pray your honorable board to establish a voting precinct, to be bounded as follows: Commencing at the west boundary line on section 24, township 16, range 8, between lots 2 and 3; thence on a direct line south to the township line between townships 16 and 17; thence west on said township line to the east line of Elm Creek township; thence south on said line to the south boundary line of Morris county; thence east on the said boundary line to the east boundary line of Morris county; thence north on said boundary line to section 24, township 16, range 9, between lots 1 and 4; thence due west on said line to point of beginning; said precinct to embrace all of the Kaw diminished reserve land except that part lying west of sections 24, 25, and 36, in township 16, range 8. For all of which, we, your petitioners, will ever pray.'

"On motion, the petition was granted, and the voting precinct ordered established as prayed for, said precinct to be known by the name of Kaw Land precinct, Council Grove township, and the place for holding the first election to be at the Agency.

"5. This plaintiff was at the time of the commencement of this suit, and now is, the owner of the real estate described in his petition herein, and so much as is in said sections 11 and 35, lies in said two-mile strip and all in said Valley township, and said section 34 was in Council Grove township as organized in 1860.

"6. On January 8, 1873, and not before, there was presented to the township board of said Council Grove township, in words and figures, the following:

'COUNCIL GROVE, MORRIS COUNTY, KANSAS,

January 8, 1873.

'To the Hon. Trustee of Council Grove Township: We, the undersigned, citizens and tax-payers of said township, do most respectfully petition your honorable body to submit a proposition to vote the sum of fifteen thousand dollars in bonds towards the construction of a court house for Morris county, to be erected on the court-house site in the city of Council Grove, Morris county, Kansas.'

Which said petition was signed by thirty-eight persons and no more, three only of whom in what is now Valley township, but neither of them on the said two-mile strip; but said plaintiff did not sign said petition.

"7. The said election to vote for said bonds was held on January 28, 1873, and the only notice thereof was given by the publication in a weekly newspaper on January 11th, 18th, and 25th, 1873.

"8. Said bonds were issued March 1, 1873, fifteen in number, each in the sum of $ 1,000, and numbered from one to fifteen inclusive, a perfect printed copy of which, with coupons attached, is set out and attached to the answer of Council Grove township, filed herein April 26, 1882.

"9. The officers issuing such bonds did not make registration thereof in a book kept for that purpose specially, but did register them in the book kept by the township trustee for the general purposes of his office. The township bad no special book for registering bonds.

"10. Said bonds were never delivered to the treasurer of state to be held in escrow, but were sold immediately after, March 15 1873, in the city of New York, for ninety cents on the dollar, and the proceeds thereof were used exclusively in the building of said court house.

"11. Said bonds were duly registered by the auditor of state, March 15, 1873.

"12. Said court house was built on lots owned by said Morris county prior to January 6, 1873, and ever since so Owned by said Morris county.

"13. Said plaintiff did not vote on the proposition to issue said bonds, on January 28, 1873.

"14. At said election for said bonds there were cast 144 votes for and three votes against such bonds, and in said vote eleven (11) persons voted on said proposition who resided in what is now Valley township, but none of them resided on the said two-mile strip except Geo. W. See.

"15. Said plaintiff moved into Morris county in 1873, and the only time he ever voted at Council Grove was at the general election in November, 1873, and he then resided on the said two-mile strip, and voted at Council Grove township polls.

"16. Said plaintiff has regularly paid his taxes every year subsequent to 1873, including the tax levied to meet the interest on these bonds, including the tax on his real estate above described, until he brought this suit to enjoin the collection of such particular tax levied for 1881.

"17. The two-mile strip, so far as it bad any connection with the subject-matter of this suit, was a strip two miles east and west by twelve miles north and south, and previous to the year 1873 the United States had only permitted settlers upon the north three miles thereof, which said three miles did not embrace any of the plaintiff's land; and between the years 1864 and 1874 there were comparatively few people on any of said two-mile strip.

"18. Prior to the creation of Kaw Land precinct, mentioned in finding No. 4, the city of Council Grove was the only place where anyone living in what is now Council Grove and Valley townships could vote.

"19. From 1864 to 1874, it was popularly understood by all the folks in Morris county that said two-mile strip was a part of Council Grove township, and such fact was neither considered nor questioned, and so soon as any of the property thereon became taxable, the taxing officers of Council Grove township assessed it for taxation, and collected such taxes; and one man, not this plaintiff, living on said two-mile strip, was once elected justice of the peace of said Council Grove township, but never qualified. From the time the two-mile strip was added to Morris county, in 1864, for a period of ten years and up to the time Valley township was organized in 1874, the inhabitants of the two-mile strip considered themselves in every respect as citizens of Council Grove township, and generally voted at the elections in said, township and acted as Judges of said election, and participated in the township government and in nominating the officers of said township, and took part in all township political meetings, and paid township taxes, and claimed to be citizens of said township of Council Grove; and neither said strip nor the inhabitants...

To continue reading

Request your trial
15 cases
  • The Hutchinson & Southern Railroad Company v. The Board of Commissioners of Kingman County
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • January 1, 1892
    ... ... the part of the plaintiff in cases of this kind. In the case ... of Comm'rs of Morris Co. v. Hinchman , 31 Kan ... 729, 3 P. 504, this court says: ... "It ... is a ... ...
  • Drenning v. Board of Com'rs of City of Topeka
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • July 30, 1938
    ... ... Appeal ... from District Court, Shawnee County, Division No. 3; Otis E ... Hungate and George A. Kline, Judges ... such a case to act promptly. See Commissioners of Morris ... Co. v. Hinchman, 31 Kan. 729, 3 P. 504; Ritchie v ... Mulvane, ... ...
  • Calkin v. Hudson
    • United States
    • Kansas Supreme Court
    • January 23, 1943
    ... ... Appeal ... from District Court, Barber County; Clark Wallace, Judge ... Action ... by Charles C. Calkin, ... may be invoked. Commissioners of Morris County v ... Hinchman, 31 Kan. 729, 736, 3 P. 504; City of ... ...
  • Schmitz v. Zeh
    • United States
    • Minnesota Supreme Court
    • January 15, 1904
    ...entirely, passed from memory, would, it seems to us, be doing manifest injustice to the present holders of the bonds." In Board v. Hinchman, 31 Kan. 729, 3 P. 509, the supreme court held that where aid is given to railroads under enabling acts and bonds issued in exchange for stock, or the ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT