56 So. 2d 394 | Miss. | 1952
This suit involves the question of the validity of bonds to the amount of $40,000 ordered to be issued by the Board of Supervisors of Neshoba County for the benefit of the East Neshoba County Vocational High School District, and more particularly for the purpose of providing funds to erect and equip a school building in said district. The bonds in question are proposed to be issued under the authority of Chapter 231 of the Mississippi Laws of 1950. The Bast Neshoba County Vocational High School District is a line school with its territory located partly in Neshoba County and partly in Kemper County, having the greatest assessed valuation of taxable property within such district in Neshoba County. Section 8 of Chapter 231 of the Laws of 1950, reads in part as follows:
“If the territory of such school district lies in two or more counties, bonds may be issued as provided herein by
In conformity with the requirements of the quoted provisions of Section 8 of Chapter 231 of the Mississippi Laws of 1950, petitions were separately circulated in that portion of the territory lying in Kemper County and also in that portion of the territory lying in Neshoba County, praying for the issuance of the bonds in question, the petitions in each instance being signed by a majority of the qualified electors in the respective parts of the school district, and said petitions so signed were presented to the respective boards of supervisors of said counties. The Board of Supervisors of Kemper County determined by resolution entered upon its minutes the number of quali
The respective petitions were, in all respects, in full conformity with the requirement of Section 8 of Chapter 231 of the Laws of 1950. On the hearing of the cause in the circuit court, the objectors offered to introduce proof in support of their objection that the school district had not been legally organized and that the amount of the bonds added to the other outstanding indebtedness of the district exceeded the debt limitation. Objection was made to the introduction of this testimony and the same was sustained.
The contention of the appellants that the question of issuance of the bonds in question had been previously adjudicated is in our judgment without merit. The contention is based upon the decision of this Court in the case of Marshall v. Williamson, Miss., 47 So. (2d) 814. That case, however, dealt with an entirely different proposed issue of bonds and has no application to the issue of bonds here involved. The appeal which the appellants prosecuted from the order of the Board of Supervisors of Neshoba County to the circuit court was under and pursuant to Section 1195 of the Mississippi Code of 1942. This section provides that any person desiring to appeal from a decision of the board of supervisors shall, within ten days of the date of adjournment of the board, embody the facts, judgment and decision in a bill of exceptions, which bill of exceptions, when properly
Under the provisions of said Section 1195 of the Mississippi Code of 1942, the circuit court had authority to hear and determine the matter only on the case as presented by the bill of exceptions as an appellate court, and hence the trial court was correct in refusing to permit the introduction of evidence on the hearing of the cause in the circuit court. This question was expressly decided by this court in the case of City of Greenwood v. Henderson, 84 Miss. 802, 37 So. 745, wherein the Court, speaking through Justice Calhoon, said: “We are constrained to hold that an appeal from a municipal board to a circuit court can be heard only on a bill of exceptions ‘embodying the facts and decisions of the board,’ under section 79 of the Revised Code of 1892. The appeal must be heard and decided on the record so made, and cannot be considered on oral testimony by agreement of the parties, whether or not confined to witnesses examined before the board. It is jurisdictional, under the statute. ’ ’
We have carefully considered the other objections of appellants to the proposed bond issue and find no merit therein. We. are of the opinion that the proceedings for the issuance of the bonds were in all respects lawful and that the judgment of the circuit court in affirming the order of the Board of Supervisors of Ne
Affirmed.