Spillers v. Smith
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Logan Chancery Court; I. V. Bourland, Chancellor; The original act creating the fencing district is in violation of the Constitution, art. 12, § 2. 59 Ark. 513. The boundaries of a corporation cannot be enlarged or reduced by special act. 36 Ark. 166. If the original act was unconstitutional, subsequent legislation would likewise he void. The act is also void in seeking to take private property for public use without compensation therefor.
Read the full summary
Appeal from Logan Chancery Court; I. V. Bourland, Chancellor; The original act creating the fencing district is in violation of the Constitution, art. 12, § 2. 59 Ark. 513. The boundaries of a corporation cannot be enlarged or reduced by special act. 36 Ark. 166. If the original act was unconstitutional, subsequent legislation would likewise he void. The act is also void in seeking to take private property for public use without compensation therefor. Art. 12, § 9, Const.; Kirby’s Dig. § 2899; 80 S. W. 832; Taylor on Corp. § 173; Wood on Nuisances, § 762.
1Opinion of the CourtBattle, J.
The General Assembly of the State of Arkansas, by an act entitled “An act to authorize a fencing district in Logan County,” approved January 30, 1893, authorized the for- ’ mation of a' fencing district within that county, in certain described limits; the boundaries being fixed by the act, with no authority given to any court to change them. The. district was formed, and a board of directors was elected as directed by the act. The district as organized undertook to extend its boundaries under the order of the Logan County Court and to enclose the additional territory with a fence and to levy…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Noffzigger v. McAllisterSupreme Court of Kansas · 1873
- Porter v. WatermanSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1906
- McGraw v. County CommissionersSupreme Court of Alabama · 1889
- St. Louis Southwestern Railway Co. v. GraysonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1904
- Keyes v. SnyderSupreme Court of Kansas · 1875
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Reed v. HundleySupreme Court of Arkansas · 1945
- Henderson v. DearingSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1909
- Mudd v. St. Francis Drainage DistrictSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1915