Case Title: Shoup Voting MacH. Corp. v. Board of Commissioners

Citation: 256 P.2d 1068, 57 N.M. 196

Docket Number: 

State: new-mexico

Court: New Mexico Supreme Court

Date: 1953-05-06T00:00:00Z

Document:
256 P.2d 1068 (1953) 57 N.M. 196 SHOUP VOTING MACH. CORP. v. BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF BERNALILLO COUNTY et al. No. 5559. Supreme Court of New Mexico. May 6, 1953. *1069 Richard H. Robinson, Atty. Gen., Hilario Rubio, Ass't Atty. Gen., William J. Torrington, Ass't Atty. Gen., Paul Tackett, Dist. Atty., and Ramon Lopez, Ass't Dist. Atty., Albuquerque, for appellants. Hannett & Hannett, Albuquerque, for appellee. LUJAN, Justice. This suit is for a declaratory judgment, pursuant to Section 25-601 of the 1941 Compilation, to determine the constitutionality of Chapter 192 of the Session Laws of 1951, which reads in part, as follows: On February 5, 1952, the Shoup Voting Machine Corporation entered into a contract with the Board of County Commissioners of Bernalillo County, which reads in part, as follows: The case was submitted to the court upon the following stipulated facts: Thereafter there was a financial statement certified to by H.R. MacGibbon, Manager of Bernalillo County, showing a budget balance of $448,266.44, which was filed with the court. Based upon the above stipulated facts the court entered a judgment declaring the above Act unconstitutional. The only error assigned in this court is: The above section of the constitution unequivocally forbids contraction of any debt for any purpose other than for erecting necessary public buildings or constructing or repairing public roads and bridges, and then, only after the proposition to create such debt shall have been submitted to the qualified electors of the county and approved by a majority of those voting thereon. Thus, it will be observed that the board of county commissioners could not carry out the provisions of the above Act without incurring an indebtedness which is forbidden by the Constitution. See, State ex rel. Capitol Addition Bldg. Comm. v. Connelly, 39 N.M. 312, 46 P.2d 1097, 100 A.L.R. 878; Henning v. Town of Hot Springs, 44 N.M. 321, 102 P.2d 25. Under this section of the constitution, did the Board of County Commissioners have authority to bind the county by a contract with the plaintiff for the purchase of voting machines, to be furnished by it for the use of the county? Clearly the Board could not bind the county by the creation of a debt for the payment of which it had no power to pledge the county's credit. It is perfectly plain that the Board had no power to bind the county in this transaction, the words "no county shall borrow money except for the purpose (specified)" as used in the above section of the constitution is clear enough in its meaning to exclude the purchase of voting machines by pledging the general faith and credit of the county. We are of the opinion, and so hold, that the above contract is violative of the article and section of the Constitution hereinabove referred to, and therefore is null and void. The judgment is affirmed. It Is So Ordered. McGHEE, COMPTON and COORS, JJ., concur. SADLER, C.J., not participating.