Town of Chicoutimi v. Price, (1898) 29 SCR 135

Supreme Court of Canada

The Town of Chicoutimi v. Price, (1898) 29 SCR 135

Date: 1898-10-12

THE TOWN OF CHICOUTIMI et al

Appellant;

And

EVAN JOHN PRICE

Respondent.

1898: Oct 12

PRESENT :—Sir Henry Strong C.J., and Taschereau, Sedgewick, King and Girouard JJ.

ON APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH FOR LOWER CANADA (APPEAL SIDE).

Municipal corporation—By-law — Construction of statute — Art, 4529, R. S. Q.-—Approval of electors--Appeal as to costs.

Under the provisions of Art. 4529 of the Revised Statutes of Quebec money by-laws for loans by town corporations require the approval of the majority both in number and in value of the municipal electors who are proprietors of real estate within the municipality, as ascertained from the municipal rolls.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Court of Queen's Bench for Lower Canada (appeal side), affirming the judgment of the Superior Court, District of Quebec, which declared absolute the injunction restraining the Town of Chicoutimi from issuing bonds in payment of a bonus to the Chicoutimi Pulp Company and annulled the bonus by-law.

The by-law in question purported to grant a bonus of $10,000 to the company by an issue of debentures of the town bearing interest at 4½ per cent per annum, with the necessary sinking fund to extinguish the loan in fifty years, said interest and sinking fund to be raised by direct taxation Upon the rateable real estate within the municipality.

The municipal rolls shewed that at the time of the voting on the by-law the total number of electors who were owners of real estate and entitled to vote thereon were 212 and the total valuation of taxable real estate

[Page 136]

owned by them amounted to $228,955. A poll was held the result being that 109 electors owning real estate of the aggregate values of $112,035 voted in favour of the by-law, while 62 qualified electors owning real estate valued at $75,120, voted against it and this total valuation against the by-law together with the total valuation of the lands of the electors who did not poll their votes amounted to $116920 and thus although a majority of the qualified electors approved the by-law yet they did not represent the majority in value of all the real estate shewn Upon the valuation roll of the municipality. In the Superior Court it was held by the learned trial judge that the by-law had not been approved as required by art. 4527 of the Revised Statutes of Quebec which provides that "loans, whether by the issue of debentures or otherwise, are only made under a by-law of the council to that effect approved by a majority in number and in real value of the proprietors who are municipal electors," and the injunction was declared absolute with costs.

The present appeal was taken by the Corporation of the Town of Chicoutimi against the decision of the Court of Queen's Bench affirming the Superior Court judgment.

Geoffrion Q.C. and Belleau Q.C. for the appellants. It is admitted that the majority in number and in value of the proprietors who voted, approved the by-law, but the contention is that the majority required is not of those who voted but of those who had the right to vote. We think that interpretation contrary to the usual meaning of the word "majority" as used in the statute and contrary to jurisprudence. See Am. & Eng. Encycl. (ed. 1888) vo. "Elections," tit. xxiv, as to "meaning of phrases;" also Beach, Public Corporations, secs. 901 and 1055; Thompson on Corporations,

[Page 137]

(ed. 1895) sec. 725; Price v. La Ville de Chi-coutimi ([1]); arts. 4532 and 4536 R.S.Q.

Where the act depends upon the prior sanction of "a majority of the qualified voters" residing in the municipality, the presumption is that all who vote are legal voters, and that those who do not vote acquiesce in the result and that a majority of those actually voting is sufficient, though in point of fact it may not be a majority of all who would be entitled to vote. 1 Dillon, (4 ed.) p. 78 note, and p. 356, sec. 277; Walker v. Oswald ([2]); Angell and Ames, (10 ed.) pp. 501 and 505; 2 Kent "Commentaries, p. 367; Mora-wetz, no. 354; Giroux v. Town of Farnham ([3]); Hadley v. La Ville de St. Paul ([4]).

Languedoc Q.C. and Stuart Q.C. for the respondent. The provisions of the statute do not permit of the contention that the majority required is of those who vote only. The Atlantic & North West Railway Co. v. The Town of St. Johns ([5]).

In any event this appeal is wholly unwarranted as there is evidence in the record that negotiations have taken place between the Town Council and the Company for which the bonus was intended that make the by-law now unnecessary and useless and leave nothing but a question of costs in dispute; the original matter in dispute has disappeared and the appeal should not be entertained; Moir v. Village of Huntingdon ([6]).

The judgment of the majority of the court was delivered by:

THE CHIEF JUSTICE (Oral.)—We are all except my brother King, agreed that the interpretation placed by both courts below upon the statute is correct and

[Page 138]

consequently we do not require to hear counsel for the respondent.

The majority of the court are of opinion that the construction of article 4529 of the Revised Statutes of Quebec is very plain and that the courts below rightly interpreted that provision as meaning that the by-law required the approval of the majority in number and in value of the electors in the municipality who were proprietors of real estate as ascertained from the municipal rolls. The Company for which the bonus was intended have declined to carry out the arrangement which makes the by-law useless and leaves nothing but a question of costs in dispute. The appeal is dismissed with costs.

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Solicitors for the appellants: Belleau, Stafford & Belleau.

Solicitors for the respondent: Caron Pentland & Stuart.