Pine Bluff daily graphic. (Pine Bluff, Ark.) 1893-1942, 1916-04-18
Supreme Court Refuses Re.
hearing in Alexander Law
Test Case.
ONE JEFFERSON
DISTRICT HURT
In Five OF the Districts Bonds Have
Been Issued and Money Expended.
Court Holds Plans and Estimates
Must Be Made by State Dept.

court today refused rehearing OF the
suit from Craighead county, brought
! to test the Alexander road law, and
which decision had the effect of in
| validating 20 or more road districts,
with the result that in six, at least,
bonds which have been sold may be
! repudiated. In five of the districts,
| the bonds have not only been sold.
but the money expended. However, it
| is possible to rectify this by again
circulating the petitions, and having
the surveys and estimates made un-
der the supervision of the state high
way commission, as provided in the
law
The counties in which the six dis
tricts are located are Pulaski, Jeffer-
son, Little River, Searcy, Whit4 and
Mississippi. The other road districts
will be reorganized so as ty comply
in the organization measures, with
the construction placed on the law by
the supreme court. With exception
of the six districts, the effect of the
decision will not be serious, only
necessitating the reorganization.
Districts Affected.
The six districts hit by the SUI
preme courts decision and it's action
Monday in refusing to grant rehear-
ing or to modify its former decision
so as to not affect these districts. fol-
low: District No. 1, Little River
county! District No. l, Searcy coun-
ty; District No. 1, White county; Dis
trict No. 10, Jefferson county: District
No. 6, Pulaski county, and District
No. l. Mississippi county.
The amounts of the bond issues in
the several counties are: White coun
ty, $4,000; Little River, 100000;
Searcy, $4,000; Jefferson, $4,000:
Pulaski, 100000; and Mississippi,
100000. On the Mississippi county
district, however, the bond purchas-
ers have advanced only $4,000. On
the other five districts the entire bond
issues have been taken up and the
money spent.
The supreme courts important rul-
ings in it's construction on ths law
were that in all districts organized
under the Alexander law, the plans,
specifications, estimates and such
must be made by engineers Of the
state highway department, and that
plans, specifications, estimates and
surveys must be filed with the coun-
ty courts before petitions to organize
the districts are circulated.
Eight sets of briefs were filed in
support of or against the request for
a rehearing. Justice w. F. Kirby dis
scented from the courts action.
Decisions Rendered.
The following were the opinions
rendered in the supreme court to-
day.
By Chief Justice McCulloch:
st. Louis, Irol Mountain and South
EN- Railway Co. VS.. j. Davis, from
III laski circu.. court; affirmed.
U. S. Tega: den VS.. John NJ. Hurst,
from Marion chancery court; at
firmed.
Home Land and Loan company VS..
+. A. RCuth, from Benton circuit
court: affirmed.
German National bank Of Little
Rock VS.. r. A. Young, from s. bastian
ed with direct ons.
By Justice Wood
Arlington Hotel company VS.. E. w.
Rector. from Garland circuit court;
affirmed. Chief Justice McCullocl
olI JUSTICE SiHilH uAoSOHl.
BY Justice Hart:
VIM. H. Lightle VS.. VIM. H. Laws.
from VIII te chaacery court; reversed
and remanded with directions.
Matthews & Hood VS.. st. Louis. Iron
Mountain and Southern Railway Co.,
from Lee circuit court: affirmed
Chief Justice McCulloch and Justice
Kirby dissent.
By Just ce Kirby:
T. NJ. Without VS.. Cyril Flack. from
Benton chancery court: affirmed.
Knights of Honor of the World VS..
Eliza ]. Epps. from Drew circuit
court; reversed and remanded.
Mon oe Hardware company vs. f. |
f. Tucker. from Union chancery |
court; affirmed.
BY Justice Smith:
Mutual Aid Uniol VS.. Emma Black |
nall, from Logan circuit court: re-
versed and remanded.
Ben Fee VS.. T. j. White. from Ma
rion circui, court; affirmed.
City o. Little Rock VS.. Emma Hold !
en-, from Pulaski circuit court; re-
versed and remanded.
Fred Durfee. administrator. VS.. R. c.
Door. from independence circuit |