Price v. Walton

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit March 1, 1912

Price v. Walton, 49 Pa. Super. 1 (5th Cir. 1912)

1912 Pa. Super. LEXIS 276

Beaver, Head, Henderson, Morrison, Orlady, Porter, Rice

Opinion of the Court

Opinion by

Orlady, J.,

The court below directed that a writ of peremptory mandamus should issue commanding the city controller to countersign two warrants for payment by the city treasurer, of certain itemized bills and vouchers which had been duly certified by the county commissioners, for the purchase of supplies for the House of Detention, etc.

The whole question is so exhaustively and clearly disposed of by the court below that it is not necessary to present any further argument, and the judgment is affirmed for the reasons stated in the opinion filed in making the order.

Reference

Status: inter alia:</p> <p>\"That no debt shall be contracted or warrant drawn against the city by said commissioners
Syllabus: Municipalities — Cities of the first class — Home of detention — Municipal or county officers — Contracts—Advertisements—Act of July 2,1901, P. L. 601. 1. Under the Act of July 2, 1901, P. L. 601, entitled “An act to establish in cities of the first and second class a house or houses of detention for delinquent, dependent and neglected children and providing for the management and maintenance thereof,” the board of managers of the house of detention of Philadelphia, performs not a municipal, but a county function, and it is not necessary for them in contracting for material either to execute a written contract or to advertise it. The Act of July 2, 1901, P. L. 601, does not contravene sec. 3 of art. Ill of the constitution as being insufficient in title; nor does it contravene sec. 7 of art. Ill of the constitution as being a local or special law regulating the affairs of counties, cities, etc.