Moore v. Alexander
Supreme Court of Arkansas
Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court; Fdward W. Winfíeld,Judge; STATEMENT BY THE COURT. April 29, 1901, the General Assembly passed an “act to provide for the completion of the State Capitol building, and for other purposes.”
Read the full summary
Appeal from Pulaski Circuit Court; Fdward W. Winfíeld,Judge; STATEMENT BY THE COURT. April 29, 1901, the General Assembly passed an “act to provide for the completion of the State Capitol building, and for other purposes.” Section 13 contained the following: “That for the purpose of raising funds to carry out the provisions of this act, the sum of one million ($1,000,000) dollars, or so much thereof as may be necessary, be and the same is hereby appropriated for the purpose of completing the new State Capitol building, and, in order to raise said sum, a tax of one-hálf of one mill on each…
1Opinion of the Court
Hill, C. J.,
(after stating the facts.) The question on this appeal is whether the act of 1903, making a continuing appropriation for the building of the new Capitol, is constitutional.
The General Assemblies of 1901 and 1903 each made a continuing levy of a tax for the purpose of building the new Capitol and made a continuing appropriation thereof. Neither of the last two General Assemblies have levied said tax or appropriated the funds arising therefrom. As there is no constitutional limitation forbidding a continuing levy, it is valid, and the levy will continue until it expires by its own…
2Cited by21 opinions
- McArthur v. SmallwoodSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1955
- Dickinson v. EdmondsonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1915
- Dickinson v. ClibournSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1916
- Borchert v. ScottSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1970
- State Ex Rel. State Aeronautics Commission v. Board of Examiners of StateMontana Supreme Court · 1948
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.