Case Name: Ayers et al. v. McCalla, mayor, et al.
Court: Supreme Court of Georgia
Jurisdiction: Georgia
Decision Date: 1895-02-18
Citations: 95 Ga. 555
Docket Number: 
Parties: Ayers et al. v. McCalla, mayor, et al.
Judges: 
Reporter: Georgia Reports
Volume: 95
Pages: 555–557

Head Matter:
Ayers et al. v. McCalla, mayor, et al.
Atkinson, J. — 1. The legislative scheme for the establishment and maintenance of a system of public schools in the city of Conyers, as expressed in the act approved September 11th, 1889 (Acts of 1889, page 1287), contemplates the exercise by the municipal authorities of the power to raise revenue for that purpose either by taxation or the issue of bonds, or both. In the former case the power is derived from the provisions of the act itself, after its adoption in the manner prescribed in section 10, without any fur ther approval by a popular vote. In the latter, a separate vote of the people, in addition to that adopting the .act, is necessary to confer the power. Where, therefore, an election was held in conformity with the provisions of the act, for the purpose of determining whether it should go into effect, and the popular vote was in favor of the establishment of the system of schools provided for, the mayor and council may lawfully levy an annual tax “not to exceed five tenths of one per cent, on the taxable property of said city, for the purpose of establishing and maintaining said public schools,” notwithstanding the fact that at another election held for the purpose of determining whether or not the municipal authorities should also issue bonds, the popular vote was against the issuing of the same. The denial of the power to issue bonds in no manner impairs or interferes with the exercise of the power to tax expressly conferred by the terms of thé act, after its ratification by the people.
2. Under the facts disclosed in the record, the court did not err in refusing the injunction. supply casual deficiencies of revenue; and that section 7 of the act only authorized the levy of taxes to pay the bonds to be issued under the other provisions of the act, but if any other authority was given by said section, it was in violation of the constitutional provision cited, and schools under the act could not be maintained except by issuing bonds and levying a tax to pay the same.
February 18, 1895.
Petition for injunction. Before Judge Clark. Rock-dale county. November 24, 1894.
The plaintiffs, as citizens and tax-payers of Conyers, prayed for injunction to i’estrain the collection of a tax imposed by the mayor and aldermen, for educational purposes. It appeal’s that on September 16, 1893, the question of the establishment of schools as provided by the act cited in the head-note, was submitted to the voters of the city at an election, and the system was adopted and schools have since been conducted thereunder, to meet the expenses of which the tax here complained of was levied. On December 2,1893, the mayor and aldermen, in order to raise funds to procure suitable lots and buildings and to equip the same, submitted to the qualified voters at an election.the question of issuing bonds as provided by sections 11 and 12 of the act in question; at which election the bonds failed to receive two thirds of the votes cast. The plaintiffs contended that the levy of the tax was in violation of section 6 of this act, and of the constitution, art. 7, sec. 7, par. 1, the same not being for temporary loans to

Opinion:
Judgment affirmed.
James C. Barton and John A. Wimpy, for plaintiffs.
A. C. MoCalla, Gf. W. Gf beatón and GfLENN & Irwin, for defendants.