Wooding v. Leigh

177 S.E. 310, 163 Va. 785
CourtSupreme Court of Virginia
DecidedNovember 22, 1934
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 177 S.E. 310 (Wooding v. Leigh) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Virginia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Wooding v. Leigh, 177 S.E. 310, 163 Va. 785 (Va. 1934).

Opinion

Epes, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is a proceeding upon a petition invoking the original jurisdiction of this court to issue a mandamus. The petition is filed by Harry Wooding, as mayor of the city of Danville, against Honorable Henry G. Leigh in his official capacity as judge of the corporation court of that city. It prays that a mandamus be issued commanding the defendant to enter an order calling an election at which there shall be submitted to the qualified voters of the city of Danville the question, Shall bonds to the amount of $2,225,000 be issued by that city for the purpose of constructing a municipal hydro-electric plant at the Pinnacles of the Dan river, in Patrick county, Virginia, and a transmission line and other facilities incident thereto?

The pertinent facts, as shown by the stipulation of the parties, are as follows:

Danville has for some years owned and operated a municipal electric light and power plant at which electric current is generated by steam power.

After the National Industrial Recovery Act was enacted on June 16, 1933 (48 Stat. 195), the city, acting through its council, made application to Honorable Harold L. Ickes, Federal Emergency Administrator of Public Works, for a loan from and a grant of funds by the United States for the purpose of constructing a hydro-electric plant at the Pinnacles of the Dan river, a transmission line from there to Danville, and other facilities incident to such a plant.

On or about December 20, 1933, the Federal Emergency Administrator of Public Works submitted to the city council a proposed draft of an agreement, to be dated as of [788]*788January 12, 1934, between the city and the United States. By this agreement the United States agreed to purchase bonds of the city of Danville to an amount not to exceed $2,344,500, the proceeds thereof “to be used for the construction by the borrower (the city) of a hydro-electric light and power plant and transmission line * * * on a site known as the ‘Pinnacles Mountain Tract’ in Patrick county.” It further agreed to “grant to the borrower an amount not to exceed thirty per centum of the cost of labor and materials employed on the project,” but stipulated that the total of the loan and grant should not exceed the cost of the project, and should in no event exceed $3,000,000. This agreement contained a number of conditions precedent to the making of the loan and grant by the United States. It is a long document, containing many terms and provisions, which need not be set out here.

In accordance with a resolution of the city council, the mayor of the city executed this agreement in the name of the city. Harold L. Ickes, Federal Emergency Administrator of Public Works, executed it in the name of the United States of America. It was executed by these officers at some time between December 20, 1933, and January 24, 1934, and on the latter date a copy thereof was printed at length by order of the city council in one of the daily papers published in the city.

On January 27, 1934, an ordinance was adopted by the city council and approved by the mayor which, omitting only the schedule of the installment payments mentioned in section 2, reads as follows:

“Be it ordained by the council of the city of Danville as follows:

“Section 1. In order to enable the city of Danville to carry on more economically and adequately the undertaking of generating and supplying electric current to the city and its inhabitants, it is expedient for the city to borrow two million three hundred and forty-four thousand five hundred dollars ($2,344,500) and to issue $2,344,500 principal amount of electric revenue bonds of the city for the [789]*789money so borrowed, such bonds to be payable exclusively from the receipts of the undertaking for which they are issued, without recourse against the general credit or taking power of the city. Accordingly, such borrowing and bond issue are hereby authorized. The proceeds of the sale of said bonds shall be used for the purpose of enlarging the present electric plant and system of the city of Danville.

“Section 2. The said bonds shall be dated April 1, 1934. They shall bear interest at the rate of four per centum (4%) per annum, payable semi-annually. The principal of said bonds shall be payable in annual installments on the first day of April in each year, as follows: (Here follows a schedule of installments payable each year during the period 1935-1963).

“Section 3. The said bonds shall be issued under and in compliance with clause (b) of section 127 of the Constitution of Virginia, and shall not be included in determining the limitation of the power of the city of Danville to incur indebtedness. The principal and interest of said bonds shall be payable exclusively from the receipts of the undertaking for which they are issued.

“Section 4. No bonds shall be issued under the authority of this ordinance until said bonds shall have been approved by the affirmative vote of a majority of the qualified voters of the city of Danville voting upon the question of their issuance. The city clerk is hereby directed to present forthwith a certified copy of this ordinance to the Corporation Court of the city of Danville, or to the judge thereof in vacation, and said court or judge is hereby authorized to enter an order directing the proper election officials of the city of Danville to take such steps and prepare such means as may be necessary to submit to the qualified voters of the city the question of whether said bonds shall be issued, and to make such order as may be proper to give due publicity to such election.

“Section 5. This ordinance shall take effect in the manner provided by law.”

A copy of this ordinance was duly presented to the judge [790]*790of the corporation court of the city, who on January 29, 1934, entered an order calling an election to be held on February 26, 1934, in accordance with the provisions of this ordinance.

A majority of the qualified voters who voted at this election voted against the issuance of bonds, the vote being 1,498 for the bond issue and 1,684 against it; and on April 20, 1934, the judge of the corporation court entered an order so finding and certifying.

Neither the ordinance, the order of the judge calling this election, nor the notice of the election made any reference to the fact that the construction for which it was proposed to issue bonds was the construction of a hydro-electric plant at the Pinnacles of the Dan. But the council in its advocacy of the proposed bond issue publicly, through the newspapers and in other ways, told the voters of the city that this was the purpose for which the bond issue was proposed, and that it was proposed to sell the bonds to and procure a grant of aid for this purpose from the United States in accordance with the agreement heretofore mentioned.

Some of the citizens of Danville were not satisfied with the decision of the majority of the voters at this election, and continued to agitate for the construction by the city of a hydro-electric plant at the Pinnacles of the Dan.

On October 10, 1934, the city council passed and the mayor approved an ordinance, the material parts of which read as follows, the italics being ours:

“Be it ordained by the council of the city of Danville as follows:

“Whereas, the committee of citizens appointed to make a study of Danville’s power problem has, upon the advice of Charles T.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Ellington v. MacIvor
59 Va. Cir. 63 (Virginia Circuit Court, 2002)
De Groff v. Hunsicker
141 F. Supp. 592 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1956)
C. I. T. Corp. v. Guy
195 S.E. 659 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1938)
Ennis v. Town of Herndon
191 S.E. 685 (Supreme Court of Virginia, 1937)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
177 S.E. 310, 163 Va. 785, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wooding-v-leigh-va-1934.