Walling v. Lummis

Citations

• 16 S.D. 349
• 92 N.W. 1063
• 1902 S.D. LEXIS 117

Syllabus

<p>1. Where taxes had been levied in excess of the amount of the warrants issued, such warrants were a legal indebtedness of the county, though an amount insufficient to pay them had1 been actually collected.</p> <p>2. The issuance of 4 per cent bonds by a county to refund 7 per cent warrants, as allowed by Laws 1901, c. 94, was not unlawful, though it had already exceeded the limit of 5 per cent, indebetedness allowed by Const.art. 13, § 4, since by the exchange of the bonds for the warrants the indebtedness would be diminished, rather than increased.</p> <p>3. Laws 1901, c. 94, entitled “An act authorizing counties to fund their outstanding indebtedness,” was not a violation of Const, art. 3, § 21, which provides that “no law shall embrace more than one subject, which shall be expressed in its title,” though such title did not indicate the. character of the indebtedness to be funded.</p>