The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1899-08-27
WARRANTS AAN GOOD
important Tax Case Decided
by the Supreme Court
LIMIT UPON INDEBTEDNESS
Does Not Apply Previous to
the First Assessment.

0uIuE1e, ~. H, aug. So.-Au aA StN.AA-S.'
handed down by Justice Hainer, the su-
preme court Of the territory has legallsed
thousands Of dollars worth OF warrants Is
sued BY counties to meet necessary ex-
penses in the preliminary stages Of gov
eminent prior TO an assessment. The
question was brought to An issue in the
appeal case brought By the counts CONF
mizs:oners of Roger Mills county versus
the hsIl Lithographing company Of To-
peka. and the chief point 20 be settled was
the mooted right of a county to Incur In
detteoness. under the federal restricti5 n
and the per cent Limitation. before any
asse. sment had been made upon which to
base the Indebtedness. The syllabus. or
digest, OF Justice Hainers opinion b a.
follows:
l. Section 4 Of the act Of congress OF
July 50 1856, which ordains: That no
political or municipal corporation, county
or other subdivision of the territories OF
the Unsted States shall ever become in
debted in any manner or FOR any purpose
ing existing indebtedness, exceeding four
per centum on the valua of the taxable
property within such corporation. county
or subdivision. to be aScertained by the
last assessment for territorial and county
taxes previous to the mourning Of such
indebtedness" Is not a grant of power
upon the county to incur Indebtedness
but is limitation thereon.
2 The manifest intention OF said act
was to limit the amount OF indebtedness
that may be created by the various mu-
inequalities in the territories of the United
States, and not to prohibit them from in
curing any Indebtedness for the purpose
OF carrying on the ordinary and neees-
sary functions of local government, be-
fore an assessment was made as provid-
ed by law and within the purvie wof this
act.
g. In determining the limit Of power,
that is the amount OF indebtedness which
a municipality may create. two factors
are to be considered: u the amount OF
the warrants or other obligations that
have been issued, and (2) the amount of
the assessed value of the property within
the corporation for the purpose of tax
alton. as ascertained by a nassessment
for territorial and county taxes previous
to the iHrswring of such indebtedness.
These two &aportant factors are not the
source of phnicipal power TO create in
debtedness. but they are tn two neces-
sary factors by which the limitation Is to
be determined. Hence, the ascertain
ment Of taxable property within the cor
poratfon = the means Of determining
whether or not the federal limitation has
been reached or passed. and 1t Is not to
be regarded as the source Of power upon
which any Indebtedness may be basel.
And the fact that a newly organized
county or municipal corporation has been
unable 10 make an assessment, does not
warrant US in constituting this act to
mean that there Is total want of power
to create any indebtedness within such
county or municipality. regardless Of the
amount OF taxable property therein.
T. 1t must therefore follow that Sec
ton of said act does not become OPP
erative until the value Of the taxable
property within the county or municipal
ity has been ascertained by an assess
ment for territorial and county taxes, for
the reason that. until such an assess
ment has been made there is no means
OF determining the value Of the taxable |
property within the county or munich |
pality, and hence there is no standard |
for ascertaining the limit of Indebtedness |
that may be created within the puryiew |
of said act
s. newly organized county In this |
territory has the power to incur a valid |
and issue warrants as an |
evidence thereof. prior to the making OF |
territorial and county taxation. to meet |
the ordinary and necessary expenses OF |
carrying on and conducting the functions |
of county government: and the mourning /
of such an indebtedness is not In viola |
ton Of section 4 Of the act Of congress Of !
July 30. 1856. which prescribes. among |
other things. that no county shall ever |
become indebted IN excess Of 4 per cent |
UNI of the value of the taxable property |
therein. 10 be ascertaIned by the last as
sessment for territorial and county taxes.
previous 20 the mourning of such Indebt-
edness.
Opinions in the following cases were
handed down by the court today:
BY CHIEF JUSTICE BURFoRD.
Morris Brown vs.. Laura Donnelly. from
Noble county: affirmed at cost OF plain
till.
Allen J. Acres ~. Warren K Snyder,
from Noble county; affirmed at cost Of
plaintiff.
Fire ExtinguIsher Manufacturing COM
pany vs.. City Of ePrry. from Noble coun-
": affirmed.
BY JUSTICE IRWIN.
BENJAMIN L. Kutley VS. Mary Dykes.
from Noble county: the case f. corrected
to sustain the entire judgment below:
affirmed.
BY JUSTICE MATTE.
W T wyman vs.. VIrgiIe Herald: az |
hrmed.
The following cases were dismissed:
Ellis vs- Territory.
School District No. Va. School DIS
trfct No. &
Monroe Fruit CO. vs. Bottom 4 Co
Blackwell vs.. Holt