Rogue River courier. (Grants Pass, Or.) 1886-1927, 1911-11-24
DECISION HANDED DOWN BY
CIRCUIT JUDGE CALKINs.
NOW UP TO SUPREME COURT
IL Decision is Sustained Nothing
Stands in Way OF this County
Bonding.

Judge F. M. Calkins has handed
down decision that the county
court Of Jackson county had all ,Y7-
thority to call q bond election lIor
good roads. The matter will now be
taken to the supreme court, and II
Judge Calkins is sustained thore
will be nothing in the way of JOS
ephine and other counties Issuing
bonds under the present state bond
ing law.
Judge Calkin's opinion Is as fol-
lows:
The whole burden OF the plain
tiff's objection Is that the county act
ed without authority in calling the
bond election, In that said constitu-
tional amendment is not self-acting
but requires legislation to provide
methods Of carrying out its provis-
ions.
"A county is body polite and
corporate with powers to make neces-
sary contracts and do necessary acts
concerning property and concerns.
"The county court has full author
ity over roads.
1T Is contended that the county
has no affirmative authority In law
to create indebtedness, but | think
that is erroneous. That right Is not
only recognized In the statutes In
the provisions for caring for such
indebtedness--county warrants but
is also generally recognized by the
decisions OF the supreme court
These cases also recognize the right
OF the county TO create voluntary
indebtedness 20 the limit provided by
article XI. section 10, before amend
ed.
I think there is no question that
the county has the right to create
Indebtedness for the Improvement oI
Its roads as long as II does not ex
ceed any constitutional limits In thal
regard.
"The clause, but debts for per
manent roads shall be incurred onl!
on approval OF majority OF thos'
voting on the question Is limita
tion meaning stop, unless you hav'
the approval OF the voters
"The next question is, how shal
that approval be had2 II certalnl!
must be an election, for II provides
that II shall be OF those voting OF
the measure, and there Is no provls
Ion for securing the voice Of the peo
pie In any other way
1T seems TO me the method Of oh
tanning the approval is immaterla
as long as the approval Is obtalne,
as a matter OF fact
And the answer shows that ever,
legal voter Of the county was glvel
an opportunity to express his ap
proyal or dlsapproyal that 42S'
votes we're cast on the question an
that 2Si5, large majority, approx
ed the creation OF the Indebtedness
"The next question Is, can tn
county issue bonds for such indebted
ness7 II the county were 10 issue II
bonds and place the money In tn,
treasury before creating tho indebt
edness there might be some question
but the order OF the court state
that the bonds could be 80 draw
and disposed of as not 20 be Issue,
or 10 draw interest until the none
should be actually received thereto
and 10 expended for such permanon
roads.
The proposed Indebtedness In =
large no 10 make some OF the con
servatiye citizens grasp. but tho legs
principles are the same as would b
involved In creating an expendtur
OF $500 or $3.50, for, under IN
present constitutional amendmer
tho county could not legally Great
an indebtedness OF $3.50 without N
approval OF the voters; and I do n,
believe n fair construction OF N
amendment will warrant the court
saying 10 the county court;