95 So. 688 | Miss. | 1923
delivered the opinion of the court.
This was a proceeding to validate bonds issued by the appellee district under chapter 28, Laws of 1917 (Extra Sess.), and from the judgment of the chancery court confirming and validating the bonds this cause was appealed and was on a former day affirmed. The appellants now move the court to tax the costs against the appellee district under section 5, chapter 28, Laws of 1917 (Extra Sess.), Avhich reads as follows:'
“The court costs in all such cases shall be paid by the county, municipality or district proposing to issue said bonds, and in addition to such costs, it shall also pay to the bond attorney a fee of not more than one-tenth of one per cent., provided said fee shall not be less than twenty-five dollars nor more than one hundred dollars, of the amount of the bonds issued or proposed to be issued. The payment of this fee shall be full compensation for all legal services rendered in connection with the issuance of said bonds.77
This chapter 28, Laws of 1917 (Extra Sess.), is a legislative scheme by which the validity of the bonds in cases therein provided for may be promptly determined on proceedings therein provided for being complied with. It provides, in substance, that when' any county, municipality, school district, road district, drainage district, or subdivision, authorized to issue' bonds, shall take steps to issue bonds for any purpose, that a certified copy of all papers and transcripts, minutes of the board, etc., shall be certified to the state bond attorney for his opinion as to the validity of said bond issue, and that such attorney shall examine the proceedings and suggest any additional steps or proceedings that are necessary to make said bonds legal and valid, or, if in his opinion they are valid, to so certify to the proper board, whereupon the cause shall be docketed in the chancery court and the chancellor notified, who upon being .so notified shall fix a time and place
In the case of Lincoln County v. Wilson, 125 Miss. 837, 88 So. 516, which was a case validating bonds as here, in which the county was the appellant, the motion was made and sustained to tax the county with the cost of the proceeding, though this fact does not appear in the report.
It seems to be the purpose of the legislature to invite litigation speedily in such cases and have the issue finally determined as to whether the bonds were valid, and it seems to have been the purpose of the legislature to make the county, municipality, or bonding district pay the cost of such proceedings. Unless such was the purpose, section 5 of said chapter 28, Laws of 1917, would be a needless section because other statutes governing the taxation of costs in other cases are already in the statutes.
We therefore are of the opinion that the motion should b.e and is hereby sustained.
Sustained.