Woolley v. Louisville S.R. Co.

• Decision Date: 24 May 1892
• Citation: 19 S.W. 595,93 Ky. 223
• Parties: Woolley et al. v. Louisville S. R. Co.
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

19 S.W. 595

93 Ky. 223

Woolley et al. v. Louisville S. R. Co.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

May 24, 1892

Appeal from circuit court, Fayette county.

"To be officially reported."

Action by C. H. Woolley, etc., against the Louisville Southern Railroad Company.Judgment for defendant.Plaintiff appeals.Affirmed.

BENNETT J.

The appellants, as citizens and taxpayers of the city of Lexington, Ky. seek, by petition in equity, to have the election and subscription of $100,000, in city bonds, by said city to the appellee, declared void.The general assembly of the state of Kentucky, by an act approved May 3, 1888 authorized the city of Lexington to subscribe as much as $100,000 to the capital stock of the appellee, to be used in the construction of its road from Lexington to the town of Lawrenceburg, Ky.As a precedent condition to the right of the city of Lexington to make said subscription, the act provides, among other things, that the mayor and general council of the city of Lexington shall, by order, submit the question of subscription to a vote of the legal voters of said city at an election, etc., and, if a majority of the votes cast at said election shall be in favor of the proposed subscription, then it shall be made, etc.The mayor and general council of said city did by order submit the question to the "legal voters" of said city whether or not $100,000 should be subscribed to the capital stock of the appellee, which, in the opinion of the proper city authorities, resulted in favor of the subscription, and in the issuance of the city's bonds to the appellee.It is not contended by the appellants that the order of the mayor and city council submitting the question of subscription to the "legal voters of the city" was in any particular irregular or void.But it is that the mayor of the city, on the morning of the day of the election, and before the hour of voting had arrived, issued a circular to the officers of the election, which they received and by which they were governed, informing them that no payment of poll tax was required of the voters at the election to be held that day, in order to entitle them to vote at the election if they were otherwise qualified under the general state law to vote; that as the law required the payment of a poll tax and a registration by each citizen, in order to entitle him to vote at city elections, and as all citizens of the city without regard to their having paid their poll tax, and who were entitled to vote at a state election, were allowed to vote at said election, the election was void, and conferred no power upon the city to issue bonds to the appellee.It appears that 3,185 votes were case at said election, and only 2,307 of which were legal voters.The appellants claim that receiving the illegal votes by the officers of the election upon the authority of...