Court Opinion

ID: 9580189
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 22:02:59.469335+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:36:07.379594
License: Public Domain

Legge, Justice
(concurring).
In addition to being invalid for the reasons stated in the opinion by Mr. Justice Oxner, the District Act violates the fifteen (15%) per cent over-all debt limitation prescribed by Section 5 of Article X of the Constitution of 1895. The circuit decree expressly finds, and counsel for both sides *196concede, that issuance of all of the general obligation bonds authorized by the Act would create in some of the territory of the District a bonded debt in excess of that limit.
The circuit decree holds, in effect, and respondents argue, that Berry v. Milliken, 234 S. C. 518, 109 S. E. (2d) 354, 360, completed the repeal of this constitutional limitation so far as special districts such as this one are concerned. As pointed out in the dissent in that case, the limitation is expressly applicable to “any territory of this State.” Repeal of its plain mandate may be desirable; if so, it should be accomplished in the manner provided in Article XVI of the Constitution. Economic expediency, fancied or real, cannot justify its abrogation through a process of judicial erosion.