Bell v. Borough

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Bell v. Borough, 195 Pa. 299 (Pa. 1900)
45 A. 930; 1900 Pa. LEXIS 629
Dean, Green, McCollum, Mestrezat, Mitchell

Bell v. Borough

Opinion of the Court

Per Curiam,

The reasoning which justifies the decree of the court below in this case has been expressed with so much force and clearness in the opinion filed, that nothing need be added thereto except the statement that since then, in the case of Roye v. Columbia Borough, 192 Pa. 146, this court has decided the same question in the same way.

Decree affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
Bell v. Waynesboro Borough
Cited By
14 cases
Status
Published
Syllabus
Boroughs—Municipal indebtedness—Vote of electors—Two per cent limit —Ratification. A vote of the electors of a borough authorizing the council to create an indebtedness for the express purpose of liquidating a floating debt which had been contracted in excess of the two per cent limit without a vote of the electors, is such a recognition and ratification of the debt, as makes it enforceable against the borough. The power of a borough council to create debt without a vote of the electors authorizing it, is exhausted when the aggregate indebtedness reaches the two per cent limit. Boroughs—Municipal indebtedness—Levying of tax—Certificate—■Notice. A borough will not be permitted to deny its liability upon bonds on the ground that no tax had been actually levied or assessed for their payment, as required by article 9, section 10 of the constitution, where the record shows that the statement filed by the borough authorities in the office of the clerk of the quarter sessions, as required by law, in advance of the issue, declared unqualifiedly that such a tax had been levied. The holders of the bonds are held to knowledge of what the statement contains, but beyond that they are not bound to inquire.