The Carlisle independent., 1920-03-11
NEW COMMISSION ON THE pU- LASKI-LON0hE DISTRICT
 IS UPHELD
upreme Court Passes on Validity of -1ainasse Di trict Which Has
 Caused Muca Controversy

|
 The long drawn-out fight in the Pu laski-Lonoke Drainage District which
 been in the courts since last July
 an1e to an end Monday morning when le Supreme Court in final decision Tn the case rendered that the new board of commissioners had been Ie- gally appointed and that the commis- sioners were acting in their rights by selling bonds to carry out the plans of the district.
 The fight on the district was start ed almost after it's creation. and reached an almost critical stage whe Judge John w. Wade of the first Di- vision of the Pulaski County Circuit Court announced the resignation of the three commissioners originally These commissioners were: J. M. Bla- ser, B. D. Jordan and W. F. Strange ways. The appointment of H. w. Claphan, B. B. Cordrey and w. G. Darlington was announced immedi- ately after the resignations were eff | fective
 A test suit in the case was ther taken into chancery court by John Boyee, taxpayer in the district, an der the style name of Boyce versus Clapham. MT. Boyce contended tha. the original commissioners had not resigned but had been forced out by the circuit judge.
 that the new commissioners were i-- error by failure to advertise the sale of bonds. The chancery court, how ever, held that the commissioner we legally appointed and rendered decision in favor of the new board MT. Boyce appealed the case According to Will G. Akers, attor- ney for the new board, the defend ants contended that the old comlnis- sioners had voluntarily resigned be- cause of friction in the management i of the district.
 In it's opinion, the Supreme Court held that the old board had resigned and that the new board was author ized under the act creating to raise funds in any manner. The act, the l court said, did not specify in what manner the funds should be raised i Another Road Suit
 That road commissioners cannot change the route of proposed high way after a majority of residents in the districts have petitioned for a i specific route, was the substance of an opinion handed down Monday morning by the Supreme Court in the appeal of W. F. Pritchett against the commissioners of Road Improvement District No. in Poinsett county. 1 Pritchett instituted his suit against the board after his property had been previously eliminated from the dis trict by the Poinsett county judge When the district was created, Prit- chet appeared in the county court and plead that his property would not be benefited by the district and asked that it be exempted from the special assessments. This was granted by the judge but later the commissioners changed the route of the district and again assessed benefits against Prit- | chett. He took the case into the chancery court and lost. The Su- Pioiic Nouil III itS OpliiOn Sdlu IL naQ l previously held that commissions could not change district, and re- affirmed this decision. It also decided that the original exemption should | stand For these reasons, the case | was reversed and -remanded.
 Will Johnson, convicted recently in | the Prairie County Circuit Court on | charge of larceny and sentenced to one year in the penitentiary, was the winner on his appeal through the law of omission on the part of the state. In his charge to the jury, the judge failed to include in his instructions that the state must prove felonious intent before the defendant could be found guilty. For this error the high CT tribunal reversed the case.
 The cases of six of the negroes con- victed in connection with the Elaine riots were set by the court for oral argument on March 22.
 -A1