| Transcribed by Norma Knotts Shaffer from microfilm
of the Calhoun Chronicle dated 7/22/1915.
Injunction Served on Board
An injunction restraining the Board of Directors of the Calhoun County
High School from acting in any manner whatsoever, was served Monday morning
when the Board met here for the purpose of selecting a site. The
restraining order was granted by Judge W.H. O'Brien one day last week upon
the bill in chancery exhibited by M.W. Hoskins, Coleman J. Gainer, former
superintendent of free schools of this county, Dr. Guy Stalnaker, F.L.
Haymaker and Ferrell Altizer, all of Arnoldsburg.
The grounds for the injunction which, of course, is only a temporary
order, as alleged in the bill of the plaintiffs, are substantially as follows:
The plaintiffs allege and complain in their bill that the act creating
the High School is unconstitutional and void for the following reasons:
First, because the title to said act does not embrace or express the
object or objects thereof.
Second, while it attempts to provide a way and the manner whereby the
first members of the board of directors of said High School may be elected,
yet there is no provision whereby any of the future members of said board
can be selected.
Third, because there are no restrictions on the board of how long it
may lay a levy of fifteen cents for building purposes.
The bill of the plaintiffs goes on to allege that all the acts of the
County Court in connection with the High School elections are void and
without any affect for the following reasons:
First, because there was no law or authority in force or effect at the
time directing the County Court to call and prepare for holding the election
on June 10, 1915.
Second, because the order of the Court calling the election of June
10 does not provide for any proposition to be voted on, or the object of
said election.
Third, because the County Court did not sit five days prior to said
election to register and list the voters of said county.
Fourth, because no notice was posted or published as required by the
act creating the High School, except the notices published in the Chronicle
and the News, and that such publications are void because no order was
ever entered directing said notice to be published after said act of Legislature
became a law, and that said notices were not published four times after
the time fixed by the constitution for said act to become effective and
also because said notices give no information of what is to be done pursuant
thereto.
Fifth, because the certificate of the Board of Canvassers does not certify
whether or not the proposition had carried or been defeated.
Sixth, because the Board of Ballot Commissioners were not requested
or directed to furnish ballots for the election held June 20, and that
said commissioners did not furnish said ballots.
Seventh, because the special session of County Court called for June
16 was not legally convened and that all acts done by said Court on that
date are illegal and void.
Eighth because the names of no persons were certified to the clerk of
the Circuit Court to be placed upon the ballot to be voted on June 29.
Ninth, because the records do not show that said special session of
the County Court was legally convened and because said Court did not register
or list the persons entitled to vote.
Tenth, because said Court did not declare results of election held June
29, or certify who sere elected as members of the board of directors.
(Illegible) further charge that the ballots used at the election June
10 contained no information of the measure, principle or proposition to
be voted upon.
Plaintiffs further complain and say that they are informed and believe
that it is the intention of the board of directors to locate said High
School at Grantsville, with the intention of making said school a local
one, to be used for the sole and exclusive benefit of persons living in
and near Grantsville at the expense of the whole county.
While may of the reasons for the injunction are undoubtedly flimsy,
it is possible that there will be sufficient errors found in the act creating
the high school and in the procedure of the County Court to cause the injunction
to be perpetuated. While the matter is before the court and until
some final judgment is rendered it would be improper and unbecoming for
the Chronicle to give any opinion upon the merits of the case.
Whether or not the board will ask for a hearing before the August term
of court has not been decided, but it is probable that the matter will
go over until then. At any rate the levy for this year will not be
laid and the erection of the High School will have to be postponed for
another year at least. | 
