Wolfe v. Town of Mount Airy

Stacy, C. J. Objection is made to the validity of the bonds in question on the ground that the act of 1927, calling for an election, did not specifically authorize the issuance of bonds, though payment of the indebtedness was approved by a majority of the qualified voters. The objection is untenable. Jones v. Board of Education, 185 N. C., 303, 117 S. E., 37; Honeycutt v. Commissioners, 182 N. C., 319, 109 S. E., 4. Whatever difference of opinion may be found in the decisions elsewhere, it has been held with us, in a number of cases, that “when the power to incur a debt for necessary expense exists (and we may add when an outstanding indebtedness has been properly approved), there would seem to be no good reason of law to prevent the governing authorities of a town from making provision for the present or ultimate payment of such a debt by issuing bonds for the purpose, if good business prudence and existing conditions are such as to render this course desirable and proper.” Commissioners v. Webb, 148 N. C., 120, 61 S. E., 670; Jones v. Commissioners, 137 N. C., 579, 50 S. E., 291. This was-approved in Bennett v. Commissioners, 173 N. C., 625, 92 S. E., 603, where Hoke, J., writing the opinion, took occasion to say: “True, we have held in this jurisdiction that when county commissioners have power to contract a debt or to provide for valid debts already contracted, they may, in the exercise of good business prudence, issue county bonds in evidence of the obligation, the right of taxation therefor being re *452 stricted to the constitutional limitations as to debts incurred since the same was adopted,” citing as authority for the position, Commissioners v. Webb, 148 N. C., 120; McCless v. Meekins, 117 N. C., 34; French v. Commissioners, 74 N. C., 692; Johnston v. Commissioners, 67 N. C., 103. Under these authorities the trial court correctly held that the act of 1929, authorizing the commissioners to issue bonds for the payment of the indebtedness previously incurred and properly approved, was valid without being submitted to a vote of the people. The judgment upholding the bonds and dismissing the action will be Affirmed.