Smith v. Douglas County Agricultural Society

• Citation: 153 N.W. 629,98 Neb. 621
• Decision Date: 18 June 1915
• Docket Number: 18585
• Parties: EDWARD A. SMITH, APPELLANT, v. DOUGLAS COUNTY AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY ET AL., APPELLEES
• Court: Nebraska Supreme Court

153 N.W. 629

98 Neb. 621

EDWARD A. SMITH, APPELLANT, v. DOUGLAS COUNTY AGRICULTURAL SOCIETY ET AL., APPELLEES

No. 18585

Supreme Court of Nebraska

June 18, 1915

APPEAL from the district court for Douglas county: CHARLES LESLIE JUDGE. Reversed with directions.

REVERSED.

E. A Smith and T. E. Brady, for appellant.

George A. Magney and Charles Haffke, contra.

SEDGWICK J. HAMER, J., not sitting.

OPINION

SEDGWICK, J.

The Douglas County Agricultural Society applied to the county commissioners of that county for a warrant under the provisions of chapter 165, Laws 1913 (Rev. St. 1913, sec. 6). The county commissioners allowed the claim in the sum of $ 7,326.50, and an appeal was taken to the district court by Edward A. Smith, as a taxpayer of that county. Upon trial in the district court, the action of the county commissioners was affirmed, and Mr. Smith, as a taxpayer, has appealed to this court.

1. It is first objected that no appeal lies in such case from the action of the county board. This question was presented to the district court upon a stipulation of facts which recited: "The county commissioners of Douglas county, Nebraska, allowed the claim of the said agricultural society in the sum of $ 7,326.50, for which a warrant was drawn in favor of said Douglas County Agricultural Society." Such decision of the county board is appealable.

2. The stipulation was that at the November election, 1912, of a member of congress for that district there were cast in Douglas county 29,306 votes. On the basis of five inhabitants for each voter, as the section quoted provides, and allowing five cents for each inhabitant, the court found the amount due the society under that statute to be as before stated. It is objected that the said act of 1913 is invalid, because the act is broader than the title.

The act of 1913 purports to amend the former statute, section 3019 Ann. St. 1911. That section provided for the donation by the county of the sum of three cents for each inhabitant of the county. The new act increased this to five cents for each inhabitant. The title contained the limitation "that said county aid shall not exceed the amount actually paid by such society for premiums other than speed." The court allowed the five cents per inhabitant provided for in the body of the act without the limitation indicated in the title. If the act had been limited as stated in the title, the amount allowed under this evidence would have been $ 4,092, instead of $ 7,326.50. By section 11, art. III of the Constitution, which has been so often construed by this court, the subject of legislation must be clearly expressed in the title. The object is to prevent surreptitious legislation. The members of the legislature and the public interested are notified by the title what legislation is intended. The amendment by which the...