Tally v. Commissioners' Court of Jackson County

• Decision Date: 18 April 1905
• Citation: 39 So. 167,175 Ala. 644
• Parties: TALLY ET AL. v. COMMISSIONERS' COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY ET AL.
• Court: Alabama Supreme Court

39 So. 167

175 Ala. 644

TALLY ET AL. v. COMMISSIONERS' COURT OF JACKSON COUNTY ET AL.

Supreme Court of Alabama

April 18, 1905

Appeal from Chancery Court, Jackson County; William H. Simpson Chancellor.

Bill by W. J. Tally and others against the court of county commissioners of Jackson county and others. From a judgment dismissing the bill, complainants appeal. Affirmed.

It was averred in the bill that the court of county commissioners of Jackson county had made a contract with the defendants Dobson & Bynum, and another contract with B. B. Smith, providing for plans and specifications for a new courthouse, to be erected at the county seat of Jackson county, on the site of the old courthouse, and for the construction of said courthouse. Both of these contracts were made exhibits to the bill. It was further averred in the bill that each of said contracts was void, because they were signed by only three of the four members of the court of county commissioners, the other member of said court refusing to sign said contracts; that under the contract of Dobson & Bynum the court of county commissioners attempted to bind and obligate the county of Jackson to pay to Dobson & Bynum the sum of $35,000 for the construction and erection of the said courthouse; that the sum so agreed on was excessive, and beyond any fair and reasonable price therefor; that the complainants had had no opportunity of examining the plans and specifications prepared by defendant B. B. Smith for said courthouse, but from what they could ascertain with reference to said plans the price of $35,000 was excessive, and that from the knowledge which they had acquired from the plans and specifications the said courthouse could be erected and constructed for a sum not exceeding $25,000; and that in adopting the plans and specifications furnished by the said B. B. Smith the commissioners advertised for no bids, and in entering into the contract with Dobson & Bynum they advertised for no bids. It was then further averred that under the terms of said contract with Dobson & Bynum the court of county commissioners stipulated for the issuance of county warrants payable in amounts of $500 each, and to be issued in certain amounts annually throughout a term of 12 years from the date of such warrants; that each of said warrants was to bear interest at the rate of 6 per cent. per annum, and was evidenced by coupons attached to each of said warrants; that the action of the said court of county commissioners in so contracting for the issuance of said warrants was illegal and void, in that said commissioners had no authority to issue its warrants upon the county treasurer except for existing liability and upon funds in the treasury of said county; that said contract for the issuance of said warrants was a subterfuge to cover the illegal action of said court of county commissioners in issuing bonds by said county, which was contrary to the law and the statute as then existing; that as matter of fact the said warrants were nothing more than bonds, and therefore illegal and void. It was then further averred that by order of said court of county commissioners an attempt was made to levy a special tax of 10 per cent. on each $100 worth of property situated in said county of Jackson for the years 1905 to 1916, both inclusive; that said action or order on the part of the court of county commissioners was illegal and void, for the reason that said county was without authority to levy a special tax for the payment of said obligation to Dobson & Bynum for more than one year, and for the further reason that at the time of levying said tax there had previously been levied a special tax of one-tenth of 1 per cent. for building bridges in said county, and also a special tax of one-tenth of 1 per cent for the payment of annual interest on county bonds theretofore issued for the building and construction of public roads, which said levies of taxes were operative and in force at the time of the attempted levy of the special courthouse tax. The proceedings and orders of the court of county commissioners...