Willi ill * 1*1- ' r I i I 'i Cornell University Library KF 6775.D28 Municipal bonds held void including iss 3 1924 020 005 314 CORNELL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY BEQUEST OF STEWART HENRY BURNHAM 1943 The original of this book is in the Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924020005314 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID INCLUDING ISSUES ENJOINED, REGISTRATION OR CERTIFICA- TION DENIED, ISSUANCE NOT COMPELLED, VALIDATION REFUSED AND ALL PRO- CEEDINGS DETERMINING ILLEGALITY BY MAURICE B. DEAN OF THE NEW YORK BAR, AUTHOR OF DEAN'S DIGEST OF CORPORATION CASES NEW YORK MOODY'S MAGAZINE BOOK DEPARTMENT 1912 i IN IV I: :u; l'i Y i I..KAUY k °7 & Copyright, 1911, by MAURICE B. DEAN PREFACE The object of this work is the compilation, in the form of a ready reference book, of all cases in the United States holding municipal bonds void or determining t^eir illegality prior to issuance, for use by owners and dealers in municipal bonds and banks loaning on such securities as collateral so as to guard against the illegal issues that are at the present time floating around the country like derelicts upon a sea. Table I As a rule, municipal bonds are free from the disagreeable taint of illegality. There are just 510 exceptions to the rule, in- volving $199,965,512, as shown in Table I. The only states and territories in which municipal bonds have never been held void are Alaska, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Flor- ida, Georgia, Idaho, Massachusetts, Maine, Montana, New Hampshire, Nevada, New Mexico, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Is- land, Utah, Vermont and Wyoming. In 249 decisions municipal bonds to the extent of $23,626,955 have been held absolutely void after issuance and delivery. In 56 additional cases the amount was not stated, making the total number of cases 305. Issue was enjoined in 125 cases of which 105 involved the amount of $171,646,600, the amount not being stated in 20 cases. In other proceedings preliminary to issuance, such as cases in which registration or certification was denied, valida- tion refused or issuance not compelled, there is a total of 80 cases, of which 65 involved the sum of $4,691,957. The amount was not stated in 25 cases. It is often believed that if municipal bonds otherwise void are held by bona fide purchasers before maturity without notice of any defects, the bonds to all intents and purposes are as though valid. This idea is seriously disproved in 153 cases of which 136 cases held that bonds to the extent of $6,416,506 were void though held by such bona fide purchasers. The amount was not stated in 17 cases. This rule has been laid 4 PREFACE down in Alabama, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Illinois, In- diana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia and Wisconsin. Nor are municipalities estopped from denying the validity of their bonds by recitals in the bonds that all statutes and pro- ceedings preliminary to issuance have been fully complied with, as is proven in 45 cases of which 41 cases involved the sum of $1,783,965, the amount not being stated in 4 cases. This rule holds good in the states just mentioned with the exception of California, Indiana, Louisiana, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Ten- nessee and Virginia. A few states require the registration of municipal bonds with the state officials, which is declared by statute to cure all de- fects. Notwithstanding such registration 2 cases in Illinois, one involving $50,000 and the other, amount not stated, were held void though registered with the state officials. There are 4 cases in Iowa amounting to $221,000; 1 case in Missouri amount- ing to $6,000 and 1 case in Nebraska amounting to $87,000, making a total of $364,000 in 7 cases, 1 case the amount not stated, making a total of 8 cases. Oftentimes defects are sought to be eliminated and the bonds validated by special legislative act. Such legislation is not ef- fective if the municipality lacked the power originally to issue the bonds, as is shown in 25 cases of which 21 cases involve the sum of $1 ,593,513. These issues were held void though attempts had been made to ratify and validate them by legislative act. This rule has been laid down in 14 states. In this connection, it is interesting to note the large number of special acts in the State of New York which validated or attempted to validate bonds that have been actually issued and delivered but in which some illegality has appeared. This number seems to be increas- ing each year in this state. In 1904 there were 12 such special acts; 1905, 22 acts; 1906, 5 acts; 1907, 23 acts; 1908, 25 acts; 1909, 20 acts, and 1910, 25 acts. Whether this special legisla- tion really validates the issues can be determined only in future suits by some inquisitive taxpayer. Municipal bonds have been held void though interest had been paid on them in 13 cases, 10 of which involved $721,000. PREFACE 5 All of the cases cited above have been actually decided in reported decisions. In many other cases the points being con- sidered were not actually decided although they undoubtedly existed. For instance, — probably in nearly every case the bonds were held by bona fide holders, but the question was not passed upon by reason of the many precedences in the state or for other reasons. Probably the holders relied upon the recitals in many other cases, although the point was not actually decided. This is also true of the bonds that were registered or upon which in- terest had been paid. The reasons for invalidating bonds, either before or after de- livery, may be grouped under four principal heads. 1st, the legislative act relied upon was held unconstitutional; 2d, the bonds exceeded or would exceed the limit of indebtedness; 3d, lack of statutory authority; 4th, proceedings leading up to issuance were not complied with, or in some way were irregular. Municipal bonds were held irregular in 51 cases of which 40 involved $23,471,600, amount not stated in 11 cases, because the legislative act relied upon as authority was held unconsti- tutional. The bonds exceeded the debt limit or if issued would have exceeded such limit in 61 cases of which 55 amounted to $12,348,005; amount not being stated in 6 cases. Lack of authority was the cause of illegality in 148 cases of which 119 involved $82,040,163; amount not being stated in 29 cases. Irregular proceedings were the cause of rendering bonds that had been issued or were about to be issued illegal in 232 cases, of which 203 amounted to $81,078,043. A few issues were illegal for two or more of the reasons just stated, in which case they have been repeated in the various figures; but this occurs probably less than a dozen times. In 6 cases bond owners attempted to hold a city or county responsible on special assessment bonds. This situation arose in Arkansas, one case, amount not stated. In California there are 2 cases of which the Montgomery Avenue bonds amounting to $1,575,000, were the largest. The other, the Dupont Street bonds, involved $5,000 although the total amount of the issue may have been considerably greater. Another case arose in Indiana amounting to $12,000, and a similar case in Wisconsin 6 PREFACE amounting to $20,315. In all of these cases the bondholder may have had a remedy against special assessments, but could not hold the municipality itself liable. It will thus be seen that irregular proceedings are responsible for the greater part of illegality being followed in turn by cases of lack of authority, exceeding debt limit and unconstitutional acts. In all of the above computations, the total amount of the issue is considered where it is possible to learn the same from the decisions, though only a few of the bonds of the same series were in litigation. Where the entire amount of the debt could not be given, then the amount actually involved was taken, al- though it would, of course, be far below the amount of the en- tire issue. The figures do not include state issues, which seldom reach the courts and which may be repudiated without cause, leaving no remedy to the holder. In passing it is of interest to notice that North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Kansas and Virginia have repudiated bonds running into many millions of dollars. On the other hand, municipalities whose bonds have been held void have oftentimes compromised or paid off the indebtedness in other ways in order to save their credit. This is true of Chicago whose 'temporary loan certificates amounting to $4,500,000 were held void, after issuance and delivery, because they exceeded the debt limit. It is stated, however, that the city subsequently paid back to the purchasers of the certificates at least $4,000,000, leaving an apparently actual loss to the purchasers of $500,000. It does not appear whether the same arrangement was made concern- ing a subsequent issue of $3,000,000, temporary loan certificates of the same city which were held void for the same reason. Table II In Table II will be found the amounts of bonds held void in the various kinds of municipalities and the purpose of such bonds. There are 84 cases of county bonds held void after is- suance and delivery of which 64 involved the sum of $9,793,104. City bonds have been held void in 77 cases of which 68 amounted to $9,629,925. Town and parish bonds have been held void to the extent of $2,810,375 in 86 cases, the total number of cases being 101. PREFACE 7 Village or borough bonds are considered separately although the political subdivision closely resembles that of the town or parish; $203,400 of such bonds have been held void'in 15 cases, the total number of cases being 17. Twenty-seven decisions have held school district bonds void of which 22 make a total of $198,650. Irrigation districts are a new invention and escape very lightly. California is the only state in which irrigation bonds have been held void after issuance and delivery. In that state there are 4 cases of which 2 involved the sum of $400,000, amount not stated in the other 2. Illinois stands forth with 1 issue of levee district bonds amounting to $648,000 held void after issuance and delivery. It is interesting to note that not a single county of the state of New York has had its bonds declared void and only one city issue, amounting to less than $12,000, although there are 22 cases of town bonds held void of which 17 involved the sum of $950,000. By far the greatest number of void bonds were issued by mu- nicipalities in aid of railroad enterprises, a cause which is now almost entirely eliminated. 148 cases of which 117 amounted to $8,344,250, is the record for such purpose. School purposes appear in 36 cases of which 28 involved the sum of $485,675. Waterworks, gas and electric lighting plants, in otner words, municipal ownership of public utilities, is responsible for actual losses amounting to $252,100 in 11 cases, amount not being stated in 1 additional case. The loss in bonds issued for public improvements such as streets, bridges, roads, parks and buildings and other public improvements amounted to $2,446,679 in 27 cases, the amount not being stated in 8 additional cases. Private enterprises were a favorite source of illegality in is- sues held void after delivery as appears in 19 cases of which 18 involved the sum of $2,584,000. Of this amount, however, $2,000,000 represents the fire loan bonds of the city of Charles- ton, S. C. Refunding bonds were held void after issuance and delivery in 20 cases of which 16 amounted to $980,300. For the purpose of paying general indebtedness, bonds to 8 PREFACE the extent of $8,185,600 in 24 cases, the amount not being stated in 2 cases, were held void after issuance and delivery. Of this sum, $7,500,000 were the Chicago bonds mentioned above. Table III The third table deals with issues that have been enjoined, registration or certification denied, validation refused or is- suance not compelled. All the cases in this table refer to issues prior to their delivery. They are arranged to show the amounts in the various kinds of municipalities and the purpose of the issue. There are 43 such cases of county bonds of which 39 involved $3,945,500. There are 85 decisions referring to city bonds of which 73 in- volved $169,655,673. Town and parish bonds to the amount of $1,899,614 were in- volved in 38 cases, the amount not being stated in 10 additional cases. Village and borough bonds are represented in 12 cases of which 8 involved $296,800. School districts exceeded the latter amount, being $311,500 in 6 cases, the total number of cases being 9. Finally as to the purpose of the issues, there are 54 cases of railroad aid of which 43 total $3,520,614. School purposes appear in 20 cases of which 11 amounted to $347,500. Bonds for waterworks, gas and electric lighting plants are very widely and evenly distributed over nearly all of the states and 41 cases amounted to $6,392,300, the amount not being stated in 5 additional cases. There are only a few instances where bonds for private enter- prises have been enjoined, the total number of cases being 4, 3 of which amounted to $640,000. Public improvements, such as streets, bridges, roads, parks and buildings make the large total of $19,895,843 in 45 cases, the amount not being stated in 7 additional cases. There were 7 cases of refunding bonds amounting to $21,834,300. PREFACE 9 Bonds for general indebtedness were enjoined in 9 cases of which 8 make a total of $27,979,000. The issue of $20,000,000 city of Boston bonds authorized by a separate legislative act, requires special mention and is not included in the above figures. These bonds were to be sold and proceeds loaned upon mortgage to the owners of land whose buildings had been burned in the great fire of 1872. The act was unconstitutional. Likewise the $75,000,000 Chicago issue for railway aid pur- poses was not calculated in the other figures. This issue was enjoined because it would exceed the city's debt by granting security on valuable property of the city. On the whole, Illinois has been the most unfortunate in her bond offerings having had bonds of 48 subdivisions held void, being followed by New York, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri and Nebraska, respectively. Of the large cities, Chicago has suf- fered the greatest losses in bonds actually issued and also stands at the head of the list of issues enjoined, being followed by Bos- ton, Pittsburgh and Cincinnati, Denver and Philadelphia. New York has a clean record, although the question of debt limit hovering over it at the present time is a grave one. Municipal bonds have been held void even in the hands of innocent holders upon the most technical and flimsy grounds. The real reason probably lay in the failure of the municipality to receive any or adequate consideration for the bonds which was diverted without the bondholders' knowledge from its proper uses. The courts would then take advantage of technical stat- utes to straighten out the municipalities' finances saying to the bondholder, "You are presumed to know the law." This was especially true of bonds issued in aid of railroad enterprises. This condition has almost entirely ceased. But taking its place there is another wave of illegality sweeping the country that is even more pernicious because it affects more people and is much more extensive in amount of actual loss. I refer to the wave of injunctions. A municipality spends thousands of dollars hold- ing an election and authorizing a bond issue for some worthy and needed public improvement, such as buildings, streets, roads, sewers, parks, bridges or some public utility such as waterworks, gas or electric lighting plants, then the whole matter is delayed, oftentimes for years by an injunction obtained by some tax- 10 PREFACE payer. The improvement may be of the greatest necessity to the large majority of taxpayers but through some slip in the preliminary proceedings the issue is held irregular and declared void. The cost to the municipality, the inconvenience to the taxpayers, the expenses of the bond houses preparing to under- write the issue is inestimable and widespread. The decisions quoted in this book represent all the decisions in the United States from the earliest time so far as a diligent search of the digests and records of the various states affords. There may be a few cases that have been overlooked by reason of their improper indexing or because they were not indexed at all. Such cases will come to notice only after years of research along these lines. Many cases that arose upon motions are not officially reported and for this reason cannot be found. The Bullitt case in which an issue of $8,000,000 of Philadelphia was enjoined appears only in an unofficial report; but by reason of its prominence and the amount involved, has been included in this work. The instances in which the amount has not been stated have been a constant source of regret leaving any calcula- tion at the most, somewhat vague. In the recent Hoffman case, involving an issue of $6,775,000 of Pittsburgh bonds, the amount was not stated. We therefore draw the conclusion that the figures given herein are the minimum. What the maximum figures are nobody knows. Maurice B. Dean. 20 Broad Street, New York City, September 1, 1911. EXPLANATORY Table I Column A shows the total amount of municipal bonds held void in the different states and territories from the earliest of- ficially reported decisions. The number immediately following the amount shows the number of cases in which the amount was stated. The second inclusive column gives the total number of cases which includes those cases in which the amount was not stated. Column B shows the amount and number of cases, amount stated and total number of cases in which the issuance has been enjoined. Column C resembles B, being all other instances wherein the illegality of proposed bonds has been "determined prior to is- suance. Column D shows cases wherein it was actually determined that bona fide holders of bonds were not protected. All of these cases necessarily arose subsequent to issuance and delivery. Column E shows the instances wherein the municipality was not estopped from setting up the illegality of the bonds not- withstanding the recitals in the bonds that all statutory re- quirements had been fully complied with. These cases also arose subsequent to issuance. Column F shows instances where the bonds were held void after issuance though registered with state officials. Column G includes instances prior and subsequent to is- suance of futile attempts to validate issues by legislative act. Column H shows instances where bonds actually issued were held void though interest had been paid on them. Columns I, J, K and L give the reasons for illegality in all is- sues either prior or subsequent to issuance. A few cases are repeated in two or more columns when they were invalidated for two or more of the reasons. Column M shows the few cases where bondholders ineffec- tually attempted to hold municipalities responsible for special 12 EXPLANATORY assessment bonds. These are considered as void as that was the actual effect in nearly all the cases. Table II This table refers exclusively to issues held void after issuance and delivery. The headings are believed to be sufficiently ex- planatory. Table III This table resembles Table II except that it deals with all other proceedings, other than by injunction, holding bonds il- legal prior to issuance. Such are usually applications to certify, register or validate issues or to compel issuance pursuant to some contract entered into by the municipality. ALABAMA , Attalla, City of, Ala. Actual loss. Resolution authorizing mayor to sign and de- liver city note did not confer power on him to execute bond and same was void. (1905) Gutta Percha & Rubber Mfg. Co. v. City of Attalla, 39 So. 719. $10,000, Eufaula, City of, Ala. Actual loss. Lack of authority for city to issue bonds to purchase fair grounds for private association. Were void though interest had been paid on them. (1880) City of Eufaula v. McNab, 67 Ala. 588. , Eutaw, Town of, Ala. Constitution required ballot should contain the words "For . . . bond issue" and "Against . . . bond issue," the spaces to show the character of the bonds. Was violated by election on ballots printed " For bond issue " and " Against bond issue" on separate lines with a description of the proposed issue beneath in parenthesis. Issue of such town bonds for streets, schoolhouse, waterworks and electric lighting plant enjoined. (1908) Coleman v. Town of Eutaw, 47 So. 703. , Graymount, City of, Ala. Statute allowing bonds to be issued for construction of school- houses, sewers, etc., and prohibiting an election for same pur- pose within two years thereafter was violated by an election to construct other schools and to extend the sewerage system. Election set aside and issue enjoined. (1909) City of Graymount v. Scott, 49 So. 683. $20,000, Montgomery, City of, Ala. Actual loss. Bonds issued by city in aid of a plank-road com- pany without any authority of law were void in hands of bona fide holder and city was not estopped from denying their valid- ity by resolution of the city council, acts of its officers or by the 14 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID negotiable form or recitals on face of the bonds. (1875) Chis- holm v. Montgomery, F. C. 2,686. 830,000, Wetumpka, City of, Ala. Actual loss. City bonds issued to build canal were void for lack of statutory authority, and though a judgment was recov- ered against the city on the bonds, yet city could not be com- pelled to pay it. (1879) Mayor, etc., of Wetumpka v. Wetumpka Wharf Co., 63 Ala. 611. ARIZONA $200,000, Pima County, Ariz. Actual loss. Act of legislature violated United States revised statutes, and county railroad aid bonds issued by authority of the act were void. (1894) Lewis v. Pima County, 155 U. S. 54. ARKANSAS $54,000, Arkansas City, City of, Ark. Actual loss. City railroad aid bonds were fraudulently is- sued by mayor and city clerk without an ordinance. Held, void even though the bonds recited that all requirements of the statute had been strictly complied with. (1894) Swan v. City of Arkansas, 61 Fed. 478; same issue, Hinkley v. City of Arkan- sas City (1895), 69 Fed. 768. $10,000, Chicot County, Ark. Actual loss. No statutory authority to issue county railroad aid bonds, hence bonds were void in hands of innocent pur- chaser. (1877) Hancock v. Chicot County, 32 Ark. 575. Same issue, English & W. v. Same, 26 Ark. 454. $500, Little Rock, City of, Ark. Actual loss. Resolution authorizing mayor to execute a note to borrow money conferred no power to execute a city bond. (1847) Mayor, etc., of Little Rock v. State Bank, 8 Ark. 227. , Phillips County, Ark. County could not be compelled to levy and collect a tax upon bonds issued by a levee district, as the claim if any was against the district and they were special assessment bonds. (1883) Meath v. Phillips County, 108 U. S. 553. MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 15 CALIFORNIA $40,000, Calaveras County, Cat. Actual loss. County bonds authorized to pay general debts were overissued $40,000 which were void although purchased in good faith. (1891) Sutro v. Rhodes, 92 Cal. 117. $250,000, East Riverside Irrigation District, Cal. Actual loss. Held, Whether the bonds were treated as "is- sued" on the day they bore date or on the day they were deliv- ered, they were void in the first case, because they were not signed by the "then secretary" as required by the statute and in the second case because they were antedated, the effect of which was to make them payable within a shorter time than that provided by law. (1905) Wright v. East Riverside Irrigation District, 138 Fed. 313. , Hollywood Union High School District, Cal. Notice of election stating that interest on the proposed bonds would be at a certain rate " per annum " failed to comply with the requirements of the statute that interest should be paid an- nually or semiannually. Mandamus to compel issuance denied. (1909) Hollywood Union School District v. Keyes, 107 Pac. 129. $250,000, Kern County, Cal. Mandate to compel issuance of county bonds for bridge, high- way, jail, poorhouse and hospital purposes denied because order for the election failed to specify the several distinct purposes of the proposed issue. (1890) People ex rel. Kern County v. Baker, 23 Pac. 364; 83 Cal. 149. -, Perris Irrigation District, Cal. Actual loss. Under Wright Act, providing for organization of irrigation districts, bonds could only be issued for property ac- quired, and not for water rights, certificates or salaries of officers. Bonds held void were part of a series aggregating $442,000. In- valid in hands of bona fide purchaser. (1903) Leeman v. Perris Irrigation District, 74 Pac. 24. $7,000, Placerville, City of, Cal. Actual loss. The act depended upon as authority for issuing city fire department bonds was an act amendatory to the city's 16 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID original charter. When the city was reincorporated, the original and all amendatory acts were repealed. The bonds, issued un- der the repealed act, were void for lack of authority. (1905) Wichman v. City of Placerville, 81 Pac. 537. , Redondo Beach, City of, Cal. Cities of sixth class had no statutory authority to issue street improvement bonds. Could not compel city treasurer to sign such bonds. (1902) City of Redondo Beach v. Cote, 68 Pac. 586. $1,600,000, Sacramento, City of, Cal. A statute prohibited creditors from suing the city and pro- vided for bond issue to fund debts. Held, a bondholder could not sue on his bonds but could have mandamus to compel as- sessment and levy of tax to pay interest. (1884) Kennedy v. City of Sacramento, 19 Fed. 580. $75,000, Sacramento County, Cal. Actual loss. No statutory authority for county to issue bonds for the construction of a road. Taxpayer could enjoin collection of tax to pay interest. (1898) Devine v. Board of Supervisors of Sacramento County, 54 Pac. 262. $4,000, San Diego, City of, Cal. Actual loss. Railroad aid bonds issued by city were void be- cause the board of trustees failed to pass resolution authorizing them, as required by statute. Declared void in hands of inno- cent holder by this taxpayer's action. (1878) McCoy v. Briant, 53 Cal. 247. $150,000, San Diego, City of, Cal. Actual loss. City railroad aid bonds were antedated so as to appear to have been issued prior to the repeal of a certain stat- ute and were signed by persons as president and clerk who were not such officials at the date on which the bonds purported to have been issued. Held, void in the hands of bona fide holder. "As there was no authority to issue the bonds, even a bona fide holder of them cannot have a right to recover upon them or their coupons." (1897) Lehman V. City of San Diego, 83 ffed. 669. TABLE I. See explanation of Table on page 3 Slate Alabama Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Florida Georgia Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Jersey New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oregon Pennsylvania South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Total A Held void $160,000 200,000 64,500 2,123,000 576,000 9,950,000 263,358 515,467 984,913 321,350 424,150 125,000 209,300 116,250 541,000 994,500 264,750 294,000 998,560 305,000 5,700 337,591 409,500 2,040,100 52,900 716,000 352,250 12,000 67,500 30,000 271,515 $23,626,955 3 1 3 10 5 41 7 15 18 3 7 5 6 15 11 3 20 9 1 8 4 3 4 10 13 4 1 4 13 5 48 8 23 21 3 9 1 249 19 18 3 26 9 3 6 4 4 11 13 2 2 2 12 305 B Issue $4,886,500 4 11,400,000 2 420,000 2 850,000 6 87,000 2 75,310,000 5 135,000 3 614,500 5 40,600 2 1,675,000 5 50,000 1 35,000 2 20,000,000 1 360,800 6 2,421,000 3 271,500 5 3,500 1 290,000 2 255,800 4 15,500 2 646,000 5 138,000 3 240,000 4 16,082,500 5 45,000 1 33,349,000 6 92,000 2 35,000 1 150,000 1 76,000 2 22,500 1 275,500 4 652,000 3 356,000 4 $171,646,600 105 125 Issuance not com- pelled; registration or certification denied, etc. $250,000 28,000 115,000 546,343 120,000 21,614 6,000 310,000 40,000 232,000 50,000 529,000 20,000 45,000 1,099,000 143,000 200,000 475,000 260,000 152,000 50,000 $4,691,957 1 3 1 1 4 5 1 8 9 2 2 2 2 1 1 3 4 1 1 5 5 1 1 7 10 1 1 2 3 13 18 3 3 1 1 3 3 2 2 3 3 1 1 65 80 D Held void in hands of bona fide purchaser $20,000 10,000 344,000 76,000 933,000 120,000 350,000 375,000 317,350 392,200 12,500 163,800 2,000 241,000 494,500 96,000 51,000 673,000 42,000 5,700 239,091 259,000 42,900 197,000 251,250 12,000 245,715 $6,416,506 20 3 3 4 10 136 E Rceitals in bonds not binding on municipality 22 4 11 11 2 1 G 2 5 11 3 4 10 153 $20,000 54,000 576,000 285,000 53,500 190,000 67,350 300 2,000 75,000 53,500 94,000 18,000 125,000 65,000 5,700 8,000 41,500 28,000 22,115 $1,783,965 1 41 1 F Void though registered with state officials 45 $50,000 221,000 6,000 87,000 $364,000 G Not validated by legislative act $444,500 2,913 50,000 311,000 100,000 3,000 175,000 50,000 148,000 98,000 100,000 15,100 30,000 66,000 $1,593,513 21 TABLE I. See explanation of Table on page 3 E Rceitals in bonds not binding on municipality $20,000 54,000 576,000 285,000 5 53,500 190,000 67,350 94,000 18,000 125,000 65,000 5,700 8,000 41,500 28,000 22,115 $1,783,965 1 300 i 1 l 2,000 | 1 75,000 I 1 53,500 i 2 1 41 F Void though registered with state officials $50,000 5 221,000 1 45 6,000 87,000 $364,000 G Not validated by legislative act $444,500 2,913 50,000 311,000 100,000 3,000 175,000 50,000 148,000 98,000 100,000 15,100 30,000 66,000 $1,593,513 21 25 H Interest had been paid $10,000 110,000 250,000 1,000 2,000 75,000 138,000 135,000 $721,000 10 13 Legislative^ act relied upon held unconstitutional $200,000 500,000 850,000 156,000 25,000 20,000,000 137,500 130,000 290,000 345,000 242,000 76,000 40,100 10,000 450,000 20,000 $23,471,600 40 4 5 I 51 Exceeded or would exceed debt limit $515,000 400,000 7,825,000 276,700 32,614 17,000 100,000 204,500 10,000 104,000 225,000 45,000 31,091 45,000 9,000 2,000,000 11,000 135,500 500 131,500 129,600 $12,348,005 100,000 1 55 61 K Lack of authority $50,000 10,000 234,000 30,000 32,000 75,832,500 331,358 873,767 ' 298,913 650,000 358,050 25,000 247,300 324,250 333,000 222,500 280,000 216,050 9,000 441,560 85,000 100,000 192,000 84,000 52,000 500,000 10,000 337,915 $82,040,163 L Proceeding irregular M Special assessment 2 3 1 1 4 6 1 2 1 1 22 26 7 8 9 15 7 9 3 3 5 6 1 1 7 7 3 4 4 5 5 7 1 1 8 11 1 1 4 4 2 2 2 1 1 5 5 3 3 3 3 1 1 1 1 7 119 148 $54,500 5,580,500 11,461,000 28,000 420,000 535,000 1,275,843 75,000 76,100 925,000 1,327,350 116,100 22,500 485,300 2,106,000 379,500 718,000 50,000 729,000 20,000 120,000 1,862,000 161,000 200,700 16,389,000 33,949,500 467,000 66,900 484,000 369,750 22,500 50,000 235,000 152,000 2 2 9 12 ! 4 1 j 1 2 | 2 S | 9 I 20 ! 23 2 | 2 4 j 4 9- 11 5 | 5 4 | 4 2 ! 2 $1,580,000 163,000 $81,078,043 6 1 6 10 1 11 1 5 29 5 4 11 10 4 3 6 9 1 1 2 203 6 2 7 11 1 17 1 7 40 5 5 12 10 4 3 7 11 1 1 2 2 232 I 23,800 | 1 12,000 j 1 2,315 $1,618,115 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 17 $124,500, San Luis Obispo, City of, Cat. Issue of city waterworks and sewer bonds enjoined because the ballot did not conform to the resolution. Resolution pro- vided voter should indicate choice by writing "yes" or "no" on his ticket opposite the proposition, but ballot provided for making an "X" after the word "yes "or "no." (1898) Murphy v. City of San Luis Obispo, 51 Pac. 1085. $2,000, San Luis Obispo, County of, Cal. Actual loss. Authority to issue $40,000 county bonds con- veyed no authority to issue $42,000 and the overissue was void. (1887) Sutro v. Petit, 16 Pac. 7; 74 Cal. 332. $5,000, San Francisco, City and County of, Cat. Actual loss. Full amount not stated. City and county is- sued Dupont Street special assessment bonds. City and county not liable to holder as the bonds did not create a general liability. Holder's remedy was against individual owners of lands bene- fited. (1901) Shapter v. City and County of San Francisco, 110 Fed. 615. , San Francisco, City and County of, Cal. Election for issue of city and county public improvement bonds was held under general act instead of city charter which superseded it. Issue enjoined. (1901) McHugh v. City and County of San Francisco, 64 Pac. 570. $4,000,000, San Francisco, City and County of, Cal. Issue of park and boulevard bonds by city and county en- joined by taxpayer because the park and boulevard act relied upon was superseded by the city charter. Amount stated was the amount authorized by statute. (1901) Fritz v. City and County of San Francisco, 64 Pac. 566. $1,575,000, San Francisco, City and County of, Cal. Actual loss. City and county of San Francisco was not an obligor and was not, liable on "Montgomery Avenue" bonds, issued by the board of public works which was a separate cor- poration composed of the same officers as the city. Although bonds referred to the special act and said the treasurer of the city and county would pay, etc., yet purchaser was charged with 18 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID notice of the. provisions of the statute exempting the city and county. (1885) Liebman v. City and County of San Francisco, 24 Fed. 705. Assessment to pay interest on the bonds held void in Mulligan v. Smith (1881), 59 Cal. 206. $597,000, San Francisco, City and County of, Cal. Issue of city improvement bonds enjoined; failed to receive requisite number of votes. (1904) Law v. City and County of San Francisco, 77 Pac. 1014. , Santa Cruz, City of, Cal. Actual loss. An act passed March 9th did not take effect until sixty days thereafter. Hence an election on March 30th purporting to be held thereunder for issuance of city water- works bonds was illegal and the bonds were void. (1887) Santa Cruz Water Co. v. Kron, 15 Pac. 772; 76 Cal. 222. $165,000, Santa Rosa, City of, Cal. Issue enjoined. Ordinance which provided that payment of city waterworks bonds was to be made "in gold coin of the United States of the present standard of weight and fineness" was invalid and violated the statute providing that bonds shall be payable in "gold coin or lawful money of the United States." (1895) Skinner v. City of Santa Rosa, 40 Pac. 742. , Sutter County, Levee District, No. S, Cal. Actual loss. Act providing for organization of levee district without vote of the people, without notice, without opportunity for protest and no discretion being vested in the board of super- visors to reject the petition or change proposed boundaries was unconstitutional. Bonds issued by levee district under such statute were void in hands of bona fide holder even though in- terest had been paid for several years. (1894) Brandenstein v. Hoke, 101 Cal. 131. 8150,000, Turlock Irrigation District, Cal. • Actual loss. Under irrigation act bonds could not be issued for salaries but for construction purposes, only. Was part of total issue of $524,000. Injunction granted against tax levy to pay interest on whole issue. Bondholder charged with notice MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 19 of powers of officers of district. (1896) Hughson v. Crane, 47 Pac. 120. COLORADO $400,000, Denver, City and County of, Colo. Ordinance providing for issue of city and county public auditorium bonds did not correspond with the proposition sub- mitted to voters. Issue enjoined. (1905) City and County of Denver v. EaUett, 83 Pac. 1066. $11,000,000, Denver, City of, Colo. Proposition submitted to voters of city was such that the electors had to vote for or against the issuance of bonds for eleven different purposes as a whole. Election void and issue enjoined. (1900) City of Denver v. Hayes, 63 Pac. 311. $25,000, Gillett, Town of, Colo. Actual loss. Ordinance authorizing issuance of town water- works bonds failed to provide tax levy, hence the bonds were void in the hands of a bona fide purchaser for value, notwith- standing the recital in the bonds that they had been issued in compliance with the law. (1904) Sauer v. Town of Gillett, 78 Pac. 1068. $36,000, Granada, Town of, Colo. Actual loss. Ordinance purporting to authorize town refund- ing bonds was never recorded or published. A recital that the bonds were issued under the ordinance did not estop town from setting up invalidity even against bona fide purchaser. (1893) National Bank of Commerce v. Town of Granada, 54 Fed. 100. $5,000, Lake County, Colo. Actual loss. County bonds issued for road and bridge pur- poses exceeded debt limit and were void. Purchaser for value before maturity charged with duty of examining record of in- debtedness. County not estopped by recital in bonds that all the provisions of the statute had been complied with. (1893) Sutliff v. Lake County Commissioners, 147 U. S. 230. $300,000, Lake County, Colo. Actual loss. Refunding bonds of county exceeded debt 20 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID limit. Act authorizing the issue violated the constitution and the bonds were void even though the bond recited that the act had been fully complied with by the proper officers, that the issue had been authorized by a vote of a majority of the duly qualified voters of the county and that the faith and credit of the county were pledged for the punctual payment of principal and interest. (1889) Lake County v. Graham,, 130 U. S. 674. $10,000, Ouray Co. School District No. 11, Colo. Actual loss. School bonds exceeded debt limit and were void in the hands of innocent purchaser, even though the bonds stated that all requirements of the law had been fully complied with. (1899) Geer v. School District No. 11, Ouray Co., Colo., 97 Fed. 732. CONNECTICUT $28,000 Hebron, Town of, Conn. Gave four days' instead of five days' notice of election. Au- thority given at such election to guarantee town railroad aid bonds was not enforceable. (1883) Brooklyn Trust Co. v. Town of Hebron, 51 Conn. 22. FLORIDA $400,000, Hillsborough County, Fla. County bonds to pay general indebtedness and for highway purposes enjoined. Statute requiring resolution to determine rate of interest was violated by resolution stipulating that the bonds should bear "not more than four per cent interest per annum" without fixing a definite rate. (1903) Hillsborough County v. Henderson, 33 So. 997. $20,000, St. Augustine, City of, Fla. Ordinance authorizing payment of interest at St. Augustine was violated by preparation of city electric light bonds providing for payment of interest at New York City as well. Issue en- joined. (1900) Middleton v. City of St. Augustine, 29 So. 421. GEORGIA $125,000, Athens, City of, Ga. Notice of election for issuance of city waterworks bonds failed to state how much principal and interest would be paid an- MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 21 nually. (1892) Mayor, etc., of the City of Athens v. Hemerick, 16 S. E. 72. $250,000, Atlanta, City of, Ga. Issue of city waterworks bonds enjoined. "Two-thirds of qualified voters" meant according to a special registration and not as shown in the tally sheets of the last preceding general election. (1890) Gavin v. City of Atlanta, 12 S. E. 262. , Coweta County, Ga. Actual loss. The ordinary of the county had ho power to issue county bonds to build a jail and payment thereof was en- joined. (1872) Dent v. Cook, 45 Ga. 323. $40,000, Dougherty County, Ga. Twenty-seven days' notice of election instead of thirty days as required by statute was insufficient. Registration of county courthouse bonds denied. (1902) Davis v. Dougherty County, 42 S. E. 764. $25,000, Dublin, City of, Ga. Action to validate city bonds to be issued for school, water- works and electric lighting purposes. Validation refused be- cause notice of election failed to clearly state amount and pur- pose of bonds. (1901) Smith v. Mayor of Dublin, 39 S. E. 327. $10,000, Edge-wood, Town of, Ga. Issue enjoined. Questions of adopting town charter and is- suing school bonds could not be submitted as one proposition. (1903) Cain v. Smith, 44 S. E. 5. $20,000, Elberton, City of, Ga. Application for solicitor general to validate city sewer bonds refused because city had failed to provide for payment of prin- cipal and interest by assessment. (1905) Oliver v. City of Elber- ton, 52 S. E. 15. $30,000, Hawkinsville, Town of, Ga. Issuance of town waterworks and electric lighting plant bonds enjoined. Lack of charter authority. (1897) Grace v. Mayor, etc., of Hawkinsville, 28 S. E. 1021. 22 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID $400,000, Ottumwa, City of, Ga. City waterworks bonds would have exceeded debt limit. Is- sue enjoined. (1902) City of Ottumwa v. City Water Supply Co., 119 Fed. 315. -, Perry, City of, Ga. Issue of city bonds enjoined. Purpose of issue and grounds of decision not stated. (1896) Mayor, etc., of Perry v. Norwood, 25 S. E. 648. , Senoia, Town of, Ga. Construction of statute as to meaning of two-thirds of quali- fied voters. Town bonds not entitled to be validated. (1902) McKnight v. Mayor, etc., of Town of Senoia, 42 S. E. 256. $35,000, Thomasville, City of, Ga. Issue of city electric light bonds enjoined because notice of election was illegal. (1905) City of Thomasville v. Thomasville Electric Light & Gas Co., 50 S. E. 169. $30,000, Waynesboro, City of, Ga. Petition to validate the issuance of city waterworks and elec- tric lighting plant bonds refused because ordinance failed to pro- vide annual tax to pay principal and interest and because notice of election failed to specify all the particulars required by stat- ute. (1902) Wilkins v. City of Waynesboro, 42 S. E. 767. IDAHO -, Ada County, Idaho. Act of legislature of March 16, 1909, providing for issue of county railroad aid bonds was unconstitutional. Could not compel proceedings thereunder. (1910) Atkinson v. Board of Commissioners of Ada County, 108 Pac. 1046. $55,000, Boise City, Idaho. City ordinance failed to describe the indebtedness sought to be funded. Issue enjoined. (1899) Coffin v. Richards, 6 Idaho 741. $32,000, Grangeville, City of, Idaho. Contract by mayor to purchase water plant was void and MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 23 could not be ratified by an election of voters. Hence issue of city bonds was enjoined. (1907) Woodward v. City of Grangeville, 92 Pac. 840. ILLINOIS $100,000, Amboy, Township of, 111. Railroad could not compel an unconditional subscription to stock to be paid for with township bonds when the voters au- thorized a conditional subscription. (1870) People v. Didcher, 56 111. 144. $50,000, Aurora, City of, HI. Actual loss. City railroad aid bonds were issued subject to a condition reeited on the face of the bonds. The condition was such that it invalidated them. (1881) Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v. City of Aurora, 99 111. 205. $10,000, Aurora, Township of, III. Actual loss. Railroad aid bonds issued by township were held void in taxpayer's action to restrain collection of tax to pay in- terest, because the act relied upon was not read on three dif- terent days and was not passed by a vote of ayes and noes in the senate as required by the constitution. (1873) Miller v. Goodwin, 70 111. 659. , Batavia, Town of, 111. Election called by town supervisor was void. Should have been called by town clerk. Issue of railroad aid bonds enjoined. (1871) Force v. Town of Batavia, 61 111. 99. , Big Grove, Town of, 111. Actual loss. Call and notice of election referred to proposed issue of bonds to "the Eastern Division of the Illinois Grand Trunk Railway." Bonds issued to "Illinois Grand Trunk Rail- way" were therefore to a different company and were void. (1872) Town of Big Grove v. Wells, 65 111. 263. $10,000, Bishop, Town of, 111. A constitution prohibiting municipalities from issuing railroad aid bonds was adopted at the same election at which a proposi- tion was voted upon to authorize town railroad aid bonds. 24 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID Bonds, therefore, did not precede the constitution and issue was enjoined. (1884) People v. Town of Bishop, 111 111. 124. $15,000, Brimfield, Town of, 01. Actual loss. Town had charter power to issue $35,000 rail- road aid bonds, hence a separate additional issue of $15,000 voted on same day was without authority and were void. Tax- payer could enjoin collection of taxes to pay interest. As the bonds Were not binding on the town they could not be validated by a special legislative act. (1871) Marshall v. Silliman, 61 111. 218. , Centerville Station, Town of, 111. Town bonds issued to construct macadamized road held void. There were two statutes, the "general road act" and the "hard road act." These bonds were issued under wrong act and a judgment rendered for the tax to pay interest was void. (1902) St. Louis, A.&T.H.R. Co. v. People, 65 N. E. 715. $75,000,000, Chicago, City of, HI. Issue of city railway certificates enjoined, because they were likely to increase city's debt by granting security on valuable property of the city. (1907) Lobdell v. City of Chicago, 227 111. 218; 81 N. E. 354. $3,000,000, Chicago, City of, 111. Actual loss. "Temporary loan certificates" of 1877 of city were void because they created a general indebtedness and ex- ceeded debt limit. Taxpayer could enjoin tax collector from receiving the certificates in payment of taxes. (1878) Fuller v. City of Chicago, 89 111. 282. $4,500,000, Chicago, City of, 111. Partial loss. As "temporary loan certificates" of 1875 of city to pay current expenses would create a permanent indebted- ness instead of being drawn against and to anticipate revenue or taxes for any particular year they were void because they ex- ceeded constitutional limit of indebtedness. Tax to pay interest was not enforceable but city subsequently paid back to the pur- chasers of the certificates at least $4,000,000. Appears to have been actual loss of $500,000. (1877) Law v. Huck, 87 111. 385. MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 25 $15,000, Cold Spring Township, 111. Notice of election to vote on town railroad aid bonds con- tained the condition that they were to be registered under a certain act with state auditor. The act providing for such regis- tration required assent of majority of voters living in township. As such assent was not obtained railroad could not compel is- suance. (1874) Springfield & Illinois S. Ry. Co. v. Supervisors, etc., of Cold Spring Township, 72 111. 603. $25,000, Concord, Town of, HI. Actual loss. Town election authorized issuance of bonds to aid railroad to be delivered as soon as the road was constructed through the town. The bonds were issued prior to such con- struction. Also, subsequent to the election but before delivery of the bonds, the state constitution was amended prohibiting such bonds. Held, the bonds were void. (1875) Town of Con- cord v. Portsmouth Savings Bank, 92 U. S. 625. Same issue, Con- cord v. Robinson, 121 U. S. 165 (1887), were void in hands of bona fide holder. $2,000, Cook County, School District No. 1, Township No. 39, Range No. 12, 111. Actual loss. Notice of election failed to state the purpose or question to be voted upon. Bonds so issued to build a school- house were void. (1879) Thatcher v. People, 93 111. 240. $12,000, Dayton, Town of, 111. Actual loss. Town railroad aid bonds issued under a special act were void in hands of innocent purchaser, as the act was unconstitutional "it not appearing by the legislative journals to have been passed as required by the constitution of 1848." Nor were the bonds validly issued under the act of 1867 as the bonds stated that the application for the special town meeting was made by "fifty legal voters of said town" whereas the stat- ute prescribed that it should be made by "twenty voters and taxpayers." (1877) Gilson v. Dayton, 123 U. S. 59. $25,000, Eagle, Town of, 111. ' Actual loss. Town railroad aid bonds issued under statute authorizing subscription upon conditions were void in hands of 26 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID bona fide purchaser because the conditions precedent had not been complied with. (1876) Town of Eagle v. Kohn, 84 III. 292. $35,000, East Moline, Village of, III. Issue of village waterworks bonds enjoined because debt limit would be exceeded. (1906) Village of East Moline v. Pope, 224 111. 386; 79 N. E. 587. $75,000, East Oakland, Township of, 111. Actual loss. Total want of legislative authority for issuance of township railroad aid bonds. In such case there could be no bona fide holder. (1876) Township of East Oakland v. Skinner, 94 U. S. 255. , East St. Louis, City of, 111. Issue enjoined. Constitution repealed former statutory au- thorization for issuing county railroad aid bonds. Election was void. (1872) Schall v. Bowman, 62 111. 321. $40,000, Elmwood, Town of, HI. Actual loss. Town railroad aid bonds issued without election were void and could not be validated by legislature without town's consent. Taxpayer could enjoin collection of tax to pay interest. (1871) Wiley v. Silliman, 62 111. 170. $7,000, Enfield, Town of, 111. Actual loss. No statutory authority for town to issue railroad aid bonds. Bonds were void and taxpayer could enjoin collec- tion of tax to pay interest. (1881) Welch v. Post, 99 111. 471. $100,000, Franklin County, 111. Actual loss. An election authorized issuance of county rail- road aid bonds upon completion of road. After the election and prior to completion of road the constitution prohibited such bonds. Held, the county could not extend the time for com- pleting the road and bonds issued after such extension were void and a tax levied to pay interest on them illegal. (1886) Richeson v. People ex rel. Jones, 115 111. 450. Same issue held void in hands of innocent purchaser. The fact that the bonds had been registered by the state auditor did not make them valid. (1888) German Savings Bank v. Franklin County, 128 U. S. 526. MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 27 $75,000, Fulton, County of, III. Actual loss. County election authorized issue of bonds to a certain railroad. Thereafter the railroad charter was amended by act of legislature which divided the company into three new companies. Bonds issued to one of the three new companies were not authorized and were void in hands of innocent pur- chaser. (1870) Marsh v. Fulton County, 10 Wall. 676. , Hardin, County of, HI. Actual loss. Power of county to levy tax to pay debts gave no power to issue bonds therefor. Were void. (1876) County of Hardin v. McFarlun, 82 111. 138. $45,000, Honey Creek Township, 111. Actual loss. Township railroad aid bonds were issued on con- dition that road would be constructed within one-half mile of courthouse. Was laid nine miles away. Bonds were void in hands of innocent purchaser. Recital of bond not conclusive. (1879) Parker v. Smith, 3 111. App. 356. $200,000, Jackson County, 111. Election irregularly held. County railroad aid bonds. Issue not compelled by mandamus. (1879) People ex rel. Cairo & St. L. R. R. Co. v. Jackson County, 92 111. 441. Same issue, Board of Supervisors v. Brush, 77 111. 59 (1875). $10,000, Jersey, County of, 111. Actual loss. County board had no power to issue bonds to fund existing county orders and obligations. Payment of in- terest on such bonds was enjoined by taxpayers. Holder was bona fide purchaser. (1884) Locke v. Davison, 111 111. 19. $240,000, Joliet, City of, Ql. Issue of city waterworks bonds enjoined. Would exceed debt limit. (1902) City of Joliet v. Alexander, 62 N. E. 861. $5,000, Kankakee, City of, 111. Actual loss. Bonds issued to aid " Douglas Linen Company," a private enterprise, were void. No statutory authority. Bona fide purchaser charged with knowledge of public records. (1872) Bissell v. City of Kankakee, 64 111. 249. 28 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID -, Kendall, County of, 111. Actual loss. Legislative journals failed to show that the act relied upon as authority for issue of railroad aid bonds issued by county became a law by the passage of the bill, in both houses of the legislature, as required by the constitution. (1876) Super- visors of Kendall County v. Post, 94 U. S. 260. Affirmed (1881) 105 U. S. 667. $60,000, Lacon, Town of, HI. Actual loss. Railroad aid bonds issued by town without leg- islative authority were void. Illegal election could not be legal- ized by legislative act. A recital in the bond that it was made in pursuance of a vote of the people charged bona fide holder with notice that there was no law authorizing the election. (1877) Barnes v. Town of Lacon, 84 111. 461. $10,000, Lamard Township, HI. Actual loss. Statute authorizing supervisors and clerk of town to execute railroad aid bonds without vote of people was unconstitutional. Bonds were void in hands of innocent pur- chasers. Interest had been paid. (1880) Schaeffer v. Bowman, 95 111. 368. $10,000, La Moille, Town of, 111. Actual loss. Town railroad aid bonds were issued after the constitutional amendment prohibiting such bonds took effect, and were void. (1891) Illinois Grand Trunk Railway Company v. Wade, 140 U. S. 65. Same issue, Wade v. Walnut (1881), 105 U. S. 1 ; and Wade v. Town of La Moille (1884), 112 111. 79, hold- ing the bonds void in hands of innocent holders. , La Salle County, School District No. 248, 111. Mandamus to compel issue of school bonds was defective be- cause it failed to allege that the district was not indebted to ex- tent of the constitutional limit and that the proposition had been voted upon. (1908) People ex rel. Mahoney v. School Dis- trict Directors, 139 111. App. 620. $50,000, Litchfield, City of, 111. Actual loss. City waterworks bonds exceeded debt limit and were void in hands of innocent purchasers. Recitals did not MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 29 validate. (1885) Litchfield v. Ballon, 114 U. S. 190. Same issue also held void, Buchanan v. Litchfield (1880), 102 U. S. 278. $50,000, Madison, County of, 111. Lack of statutory authority for county to issue railroad aid bonds payable by a strip of country along railroad. Railroad could not compel issuance. (1871) Madison County v. People, 58111.456. $500, McLean County, Normal School District of, 111. Actual loss. No statutory authority for issuance of school bonds by board of education of the school district other than for purchasing a site or erecting school building. Bond issued for a different purpose was void. No one could be an innocent pur- chaser of such void paper. (1880) Hewitt v. Board of Education of Normal School District, 94 111. 528. $15,000, Middleport, Town of, 111. Actual loss. Town railroad aid bonds declared void in hands of innocent purchaser for value because an act authorizing it to tax and appropriate money for construction of railroad did not give the town the right to issue bonds for that purpose. (1876) Town of Middleport v. Mtna Life Insurance Co., 82 111. 562. $50,000, Monroe County, Township 2 South, Range 10 West, 111. Refusal to issue railroad aid bonds, previously authorized by township, was sustained on the ground that school trustees had no power to bind township as a stockholder. (1865) People ex rel. Cairo & St. Louis Railway Co. v. Dupuyt, 71 111. 651. $19,000, Morgan County, 111. Actual loss. County issued its bonds to a railroad by mistake as they should have been issued to a different company. Al- though part had been transferred to a bona fide purchaser, yet county could compel their delivery up. (1875) Morgan County v. Thomas, 76 111. 120. 950,000, New Athens, Town of, 111. Actual loss. Town railroad aid bonds issued without submit- ting proposition to voters were void. Taxpayer could enjoin 30 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID collection of tax although the bonds were registered in state auditor's office. (1873) Flack v. Hughes, 67 111. 384. $23,000, Oquawka, Village of, 111. Actual loss. Lack of statutory authority. No inherent power for village to issue refunding bonds. (1897) Village of Oquawka v. Graves, 82 Fed. 568. Same issue held void, Coquard v. Village of Oquawka (1901), 61 N. E. 660. $60,000, Ottawa, City of, 111. Actual loss. City had no power by charter or statute to donate bonds to a private corporation to aid in the improvement of water power. Were void. (1885) Mather v. City of Ottawa, 3 N. E. 216; 114 III. 659. Same issue held void in Ottawa v. Carey (1883), 108 U. S. 110, but recovery was allowed when held by bona fide purchaser in Hackett v. Ottawa, 99 U. S. 86, and Ottawa v. First National Bank of Portsmouth, 105 U. S. 342. $150,000, Ottawa, Town of, 111. Actual loss. Bill for an act was not read on three different days in the state senate and was not passed by a vote of ayes and noes as required by the constitution. It never became a law, although it was reported back to the house of representatives as having passed the senate and was enrolled and approved by the governor. Town railroad aid bonds issued thereunder were void and the collection of a tax to pay interest thereon was enjoined in a taxpayer's suit. (1873) Ryan v. Lynch, 68 111. 160. Same issue held void even as against bona fide purchasers. Amoskeag Bank v. Ottawa, 105 U. S. 667 (1881). $100,000, Pana, Town of, El. Actual loss. Charter authority to issue $30,000 of railroad aid bonds was violated by issue of $100,000. Election was pre- sided over by a moderator instead of three judges as required by the general election law. Bona fide purchasers were charged with knowledge of an entire absence of power as distinguished from a defective execution of power. Not ratified by payment of interest nor validated by recitals though held by bona fide purchasers. (1879) Lippincott v. Town of Pana, 92 111. 24. MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 31 $100,000, Perry County, 111. Actual loss. A statute authorizing county subscription of $100,000 to railroad was violated by an election authorizing a subscription of $150,000, and bonds to the extent of $100,000 which were issued by virtue of that election were void. (1897) Stebbins v. Perry County, 167 111. 567, 47 N. E. 1048. , Perry County, HI. Actual loss. County railroad aid bonds issued without stat- utory requirements, and containing no recital that they were issued in accordance with the statute, were void in hands of inno- cent holder, although they were registered under the provisions of the statute and a certificate to that effect indorsed thereon. (1899) Bolles v. Perry County, 92 Fed. 479. Same issue held void in Citizens' Savings & Loan Association v. Perry County, 156 U. S. 692. $100,000, Perry County, HI. Actual loss. County railroad aid bonds were issued on condi- tion that machine shops should be located in a certain place. Shops were located elsewhere and bonds held void. (1888) On- stott v. People, 15 N. E. 34; 123 111. 489. $95,000, Pulaski County, HI. Actual loss. Gift by county of its bonds to aid railroad was unauthorized and! the bonds were void. (1892) Post v. Pulaski County, 49 Fed. 628. $200,000, Richland County, 111. Actual loss. Board of supervisors called a special election to vote on issuing county railroad aid bonds, thus violating the statute requiring such election to be called by the county court. Legislature could not validate bonds issued by authority of the invalid election. Bona fide purchasers lost. (1879) Gaddis v. Richland County, 92 111. 119. $30,000, Roberts, Town of, 111. Actual loss. Election called upon application of twelve legal voters and by giving ten days' notice violated the statute requir- ing twenty legal voters and twenty days' notice. Town railroad aid bonds issued pursuant to such an election were void. Legis- 32 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID lature could not validate void election. Bona fide holder not protected by recitals. (1878) Williams v. Town of Roberts, 88 111. 11. $59,000, Schuyler County, III. Actual loss. County court and not the board of supervisors had power to issue county railroad aid bonds. Were void. (1861) Board of Supervisors of Schuyler County v. People ex rel. Rock Island & Alton R. R. Co., 25 111. 163. $25,000 Shawneetown, City of, HI. Actual loss. City railroad aid bonds held void in hands of innocent purchaser because an extension of time for completion of the road was granted by the city council without any vote of the people. (1889) Eddy v. People ex rel. Nolan, 127 111. 428. $648,000 Sny Island, Levee District, HI. Actual loss. Levee district bonds issued by authority of an unconstitutional statute were void. (1901) O'Brien v. Wheelock, 184 U. S. 450. $20,000, South Ottawa, Town of, 111. Actual loss. Railroad aid bonds issued by town were void because the legislative act relied upon as their authority never in fact became a law as the legislative journals failed to show that it was passed by a majority of all the members elect in each house of the general assembly. Bona fide purchasers not pro- tected. (1876) Town of South Ottawa v. Perkins, 94 U. S. 260. $70,000, Sparta, City of, 111. City authorized by statute to vote on proposition for railroad aid bonds payable within ten years at not exceeding ten per cent, could not be compelled to issue, after vote, bonds payable in twenty years at eight per cent. (1875) Cairo & St. L. R. Co. v. City of Sparta, 77 111. 505. , Springfield, City of, III. Collection of taxes to pay interest on bonds issued by city for borrowed money was enjoined by taxpayer because indebt- edness exceeded limit. (1877) City of Springfield v. Edwards, 84 111. 626. MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 33 $25,000, Stites, Town of, El. Issue of town highway bonds enjoined. Proceeded under wrong act to construct hard road. (1901) Town of Stites v. Wiggins Ferry Co., 97 111. App. 157. $36,343.77, Sullivan, City of, 111. Contractor not entitled to city improvement bonds because board of local improvements had not filed certificate and court had not entered an order that the improvements complied with the ordinance. (1906) Case v. City of Sullivan, 222 111. 56; 78 N. E. 37. $25,000, Tazewell, County of, 111. Interest of county railroad aid bonds could not be made pay- able in New York City, hence railroad could not compel issuance although authorized by election of people. (1859) People v. County of Tazewell, 22 111. 147. , Urbana, Town of, 111. Actual loss. Legislature could not validate railroad aid bonds issued pursuant to a vote of a town when there was no statute authorizing issuance of bonds for such purpose, nor was town estopped from denying validity in hands of innocent purchaser by payment of interest for ten years. (1879) Leslie v. Urbana, Fed. Cas. 8,276. $99,500, White County, 111. Actual loss. Failure to give full thirty days' notice of election as required by statute and submission of question for sub- scription to more than one railroad as a single proposition ren- dered county railroad aid bonds authorized by such election void in hands of innocent holder. (1890) Williams v. People ex rel.Wilson, 132111.574. $23,800, Wilmette, Village of, HI. Actual loss. Village special assessment bonds for local im- provement were not negotiable and the holder took no better rights than the contractor to whom they were issued. As the contractor fraudulently constructed the improvement different from and inferior to the one provided for in the ordinance, the 34 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID holder could not compel the village to pay the bonds. (1906) Northern Trust Co. v. Village of Wilmette, 220 111. 417. $7,000, Winnetka, Village of, 111. Actual loss. No authority to issue village bonds to build a boarding house and dormitory to be used in connection with a free school. Bonds were void though held by innocent pur- chaser and collection of tax to pay interest was restrained. (1873) Sherlock v. Village of Winnetka, 68 111. 530. INDIANA $60,000, Attica, City of, Ind. Issue enjoined. Statute authorized subscription to stock of railroad or to donate bonds. A contract to issue city bonds upon condition and in consideration of the erection of railroad shops in the city was void. (1877) Indiana, N. & S. R. Co. v. City of Attica, 56 Ind. 476. $50,000, Aurora, City of, Ind. Actual loss. Statute authorized issuance of city railroad aid bonds to road running to the city. Railroad charter did not name the city as being on its line hence bonds held by one of the railroad company's directors was void. (1864) City of Aurora v. West, 22 Ind. 88. $12,000, Benton County, Ind. County not liable for payment of gravel road bonds payable out of money to be collected by special assessment. Were not negotiable. Holder bound to take notice of the statute under which issued. (1899) Kirsch v. Braun, 53 N. E. 1082. $13,358.53, Cicero, Town of, Ind. Actual loss. Holder of town school bonds obtained judgment on them against town but could not compel town to levy and collect tax to pay judgment because there being no express power to levy taxes for that purpose no implied power arose from mere authority to incur the indebtedness. (1889) United States ex rel. Spitzer v. Town of Cicero, 41 Fed. 83. , Covington, Town of, Ind. Actual loss. Town school bonds were issued without legis- MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 35 lative authority and were void. In the absence of a recital of facts, bona fide holder bound to know authority and could not recover. (1881) Hopper v. Town of Covington, 8 Fed. 777. $30,000, Daviess, County of, Ind. Actual loss. Railroad aid bonds were authorized by county vote but before they were issued the constitutional prohibition against such bonds took effect. Bonds issued thereafter were void. (1859) Aspinwall v. Commissioners of Daviess County, 22 How. 364. $50,000, Delaware County, Ind. Issue enjoined by taxpayer. No statutory authority for county to issue railroad aid bonds. (1875) Board of Commis- sioners of Delaware County v. McClintock, 51 Ind. 325. $87,000, Jeff ersonville, City of, Ind. Actual loss. Issue of city refunding bonds enjoined by tax- payer because original bonds issued for money borrowed to contest litigation changing the county seat and erecting court- house and jail were void in nands of bona fide holder. (1896) Myers v. City of Jeff ersonville, 44 N. E. 452. , Lafayette, City of, Ind. Issue enjoined. No charter power for city to issue railroad aid bonds. (1854) City of Lafayette v. Cox, 5 Ind. 38. $50,000, Madison, City of, Ind. Actual loss. Railroad aid bonds issued by city upon a re- consideration of a petition after it was once rejected were void and taxpayer could compel cancellation of the bonds while held by one having notice. (1882) City of Madison v. Smith, 83 Ind. 502. $21,000, Monticello, Town of, Ind. Actual loss. Lack of legislative authority for town to issue refunding school bonds. No implied power. Purchasers must beware. (1882) Merrill v. Monticello, 138 U. S. 673. $25,000, Newton County, Ind. Issue of county courthouse bonds enjoined. Proper procedure 36 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID was by written ordinance duly passed by county council not by motion and order thereof. (1905) State ex rel. Davis v. Board of Commissioners of Newton County, 74 N. E. 1091. , Winamac, Town of, Ind. Issue of town bonds to rebuild schoolhouse enjoined by tax- payer because debt would exceed limit. (1892) Town of Wina- mac v. Huddleton, 31 N. E. 561. IOWA $14,000, Ackley, Independent School District of, la. Actual loss. School bonds exceeded debt limit. Void even when held by innocent purchaser. (1876) Mosher v. Independent School District of Ackley, 44 la. 122. -, Allison and Jackson, Independent Districts of, la. Actual loss. Purchaser of refunding school bonds must take notice that the proceeds were diverted from the purpose repre- sented; that as the proceeds were not used to refund old bonds, a new debt was created which far exceeded the constitutional limit. (1896) Holliday v. Hildebrant, 66 N. W. 89. $25,700, Allison, Rural Independent School District of, la. Partial loss. School district bonds exceeded debt limit. Part of bonds were valid when held by bona fide purchaser. (1902) Salmon v. Rural Independent School District of Allison, 125 Fed. 235. $75,000, Burlington, City of, la. Actual loss. City railroad aid bonds were not for a "public purpose" within meaning of city charter. When authority was shown upon face of bonds, and it was insufficient, bonds were void in hands of any party. (1865) Chamberlain v. City of Bur- lington, 19 la. 395. $11,000, Calliope, Independent School District of, la. Taxpayer could enjoin issue of school bonds by district be- cause they would exceed debt limit. Tax list did not mean as- sessment roll. (1886) Wilkinson v. Van Orman, 30 N. W. 495. MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 37 $125,000, Cedar Rapids, City of, la. Special city charter contained no authority for issuing bond for building a city hall. Hence sale of bonds restrained. (1907) Reed v. City of Cedar Rapids, 113 N. W. 773. $60,000, Council Bluffs, City of, la. Actual loss. Collection of tax to pay interest on city "mill bonds" illegal because the rate of levy exceeded the statutory authority. Also, railroad aid bonds issued under city charter were void because the charter was superseded by an act which took effect before the bonds were issued. (1876) Jeffries v. Lawrence, 42 la. 498. $25,000, Doon Township, la. Actual loss. Refunding school bonds exceeded debt limit and were void. Holder knew the constitutional limit had been ex- ceeded. (1892) Doon Township v. Cummins, 142 U. S. 366. $2,267, Doon, District Township of, la. Actual loss. School district bonds fraudulently issued upon representation that proceeds were to pay off a judgment in- debtedness, were void because not authorized and because they created new indebtedness which exceeded limit. Payment of interest for several years did not estop district from asserting invalidity. (1892) First National Bank v. District Township of Doon, 86 la. 330. $2,500, Gilman, Town of, la. Town bonds issued for general purposes were void for want of power to issue same, but holder could recover for money had and received. (1903) FernaU v. Town of Gilman, 141 Fed. 941; 123 Fed. 797. , Henry County, la. Actual loss. Lack of statutory authority for county to issue railroad aid bonds. Bonds were void. (1863) Smith v. Henry County, 15 la. 385. , Johnson, County of, la. Actual loss. County railroad aid bonds issued fraudulently and without statutory authority were void. (1862) Myers v. County of Johnson, 14 la. 47. 38 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID -, Keokuk, City of, la. Actual loss. Act attempting to legalize an illegal election was unconstitutional. City railroad aid bonds were void in hands of innocent purchaser because of lack of power to issue. (1876) Williamson v. City of Keokuk, 44 la. 88. , Keokuk, City of, la. Actual loss. Lack of authority for issuing city railroad aid bonds. Were void. Collection of tax enjoined. (1863) Ten Eyck v. Mayor of Keokuk, 15 la. 486. , Lee County, la. Actual loss. No statutory authority for counties to issue rail- road aid bonds. Bonds were void. Levy of tax enjoined. (1862) McMillan v. Boyles, 14 la. 107. $3,500, Lone Tree, Town of, la. Taxpayer entitled to enjoin issue of town bonds for construc- tion and maintenance of waterworks because questions sub- mitted at election for construction of waterworks were mislead- ing. (1900) Brown v. Carl, 82 N. W. 1033. $120,000, Lyon County, la. Partial actual loss. Refunding county bonds were void in hands of bona fide holder to the extent to which they exceeded the debt limit. Recovery to the extent of $29,000 was allowed. (1899) Mtna Life Insurance Company v. Lyon County, 95 Fed. 325. Same issue held void, Anderson v. Orient Fire Insurance Company, 88 la. 579 (1893). $26,000, Marshall County, la. Actual loss. Failed to submit to vote of people proposition for issuing bonds to be used in constructing courthouse. Such bonds were void in hands of innocent holder. (1861) Hull & Ar- galls v. County of Marshall, 12 la. 142. $50,000, Mt. Pleasant, City of, la. Actual loss. Holder of city railroad aid bonds was not a bona fide purchaser and had knowledge that the proceeds of the bonds were not used for the construction of the road in the county. (1878) Foote v. Mt. Pleasant, Fed. Cas. 4,914. MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 39 $34,000, Ottumwa, City of, la. Actual loss. Statute authorizing city to donate land to rail- road company conferred no power to issue negotiable railroad aid bonds and such were void in hands of innocent purchasers. Nor could subsequent holders recover on a quantum meruit. (1906) Swanson v. City of Ottumwa, 106 N. W. 9. $100,000, Polk County, la. No statutory authority to issue county bonds for purchase of real estate to be used as courthouse site. Issue enjoined. (1900) Witter v. Board of Supervisors of Polk County, 83 N. W. 1041. $36,000, Riverside, Independent School District of, la. Actual loss. Refunding school bonds issued March 11, 1882, in excess of constitutional limit to take up other bonds which exceeded the limit were void in the hands of all persons, regard- less of recitals. (1896) Shaw v. Independent School District, 77 Fed. 277. $2,500, Riverside Independent School District, la. Actual loss. School bonds exceeded debt limit and were in- valid without regard to any recitals which they contained, in hands of holder for value. (1892) Nesbit v. Riverside Independent District, 144 U. S. 610. , Riverside, Independent School District of, la. Actual loss. A recital that school bonds were issued "under" a statute put purchaser on guard t6 look at the statute and see that the limit of indebtedness had been exceeded, — thus dif- fering from a recital of issuance "in conformity with" or "in pursuance of." Such bonds were yoid in hands of innocent pur- chasers. Were two series, the first issued in June, 1880, and the other in July, 1881, the latter to refund prior indebtedness. (1885) Bates v. Independent School District of Riverside, 25 Fed. 192. $27,500, Rock Rapids, Independent School District of, la. Partial actual loss. Held, that holder of school bonds could file bill in equity to determine what part of his bonds were valid and what void as exceeding debt limit. Part admittedly void. 40 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID (1900) Everett v. Independent School District of Rock Rapids, 102 Fed. 529. $375,000, Scott, County of, la. Issue of railroad aid bonds enjoined. County had no stat- utory authority. (1859) Stokes v. County of Scott, 10 la. 166. $15,000, Steamboat Rock, Independent School District of, la. Actual loss. School bonds were void because they exceeded constitutional limit of indebtedness. A recital that the bonds were issued pursuant to an election and by authority of a cer- tain law did not estop the district even against bona fide holder. (1882) School District v. Stone, 106 U. S. 183. $100,000, Wapello, County of, la. Constitution did not authorize counties to issue railroad aid bonds. Subscription by county unenforceable. (1862) State v. County of Wapello, 13 la. 388. , Washington County, la. Actual loss. Act authorizing counties to aid railroads by is- suance of bonds was unconstitutional. Collection of tax to pay interest enjoined by taxpayer. (1868) McClure v. Owen, 26 la. 243. $20,000, Woodbury County, la. Contract by county to issue its bonds was unenforceable be- cause it failed to submit to voters the proposition for purchas- ing courthouse. (1862) Casady v. Woodbury County, 13 la. 113. KANSAS $5,000, Abilene, City of, Kan. Actual loss. Although city refunding school bonds recited they were issued in conformity to and in compliance with a cer- tain act, yet held void in the hands of innocent purchaser, be- cause they were authorized by a resolution instead of by an or- dinance as required by statute; nor did they refund any lawful debt. (1898) Edminson v. City of Abilene, 54 Pac. 568. $21,000, Agency, Township of, Kansas. Could not compel issuance of township railroad aid bonds as MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 41 they would exceed debt limit. (1888) Chicago, K. & W. By. Co. v. Freeman, 38 Kan. 597, 16 Pac. 828. $160,000, Anderson County, Kan. Actual loss. County railroad aid bonds were void because meeting of county board at which subscription was authorized was held without notice to one member thereof. (1876) Paola & Fall River Ry. Co. v. Commissioners of Anderson County, 16 Kan. 302. , Atchison, City of, Kan. Issue of school bonds by first class city enjoined because of lack of authority of board of education to issue them. (1879) Board of Education of City of Atchison v. Kansas, 26 Kan. 44. $10,000, Atchison, City of, Kan. Refunding bonds issued by city without statutory authority were void but holders of original bonds would be protected. (1888) Brown v. City of Atchison, 17 Pac. 465; 39 Kan. 37. $100,000, Barbour County, Kan. Actual loss. County railroad aid bonds were fraudulently issued and were void. Recital that they were issued under a certain statute charged bona fide purchaser with notice that such statute required registry by state auditor and delivery by state treasurer. (1880) Lewis v. Barbour County, 3 Fed. 191. $10,000, Blue Rapids, Township of, Kan. Actual loss. Township bonds issued to a manufacturing company to assist in building a dam were void because the act purporting to be their authority was unconstitutional as au- thorizing public aid to a purely private enterprise. A recital in the bonds that they were issued pursuant to a certain act charged the holder with knowledge of the constitutionality of the act. (1880) Central Branch U. P. R. Co. v. Smith, 23 Kan. 525. $150,000, Bourbon, County of, Kan. Actual loss. A vote to issue county railroad aid bonds to "any corporation now organized or that may hereafter be or- ganized" was illegal and violated the statute requiring that an 42 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID existing corporation must be named. County commissioners fraudulently canvassed the votes, which appeared upon the face of their return by the omission of certain townships. Bonds were void and bona fide purchasers were charged with the lack of authority of commissioners to issue them. (1873) Lewis v. Bourbon County, 12 Kan. 186. $614.15, Center Township, Kan. Town voted to subscribe $27,000 to railroad and to issue its bonds in payment. Railroad could enforce agreement except as to $614.15 which exceeded debt limit. (1882) Turner v. Board of Commissioners of Woodson County, 27 Kan. 314. $30,000, Comanche County, Kan. Statute gave county power to issue bonds "when a deficit actually occurred" in the county finances. No deficit occurred but the bonds were issued "to meet current expenses of the county in case of a deficit in the county revenue." Held, void in hands of innocent purchaser. Recitals did not estop county. Lewis v. Comanche County, 35 Fed. 343. , Fargo Township, Kan. Actual loss. Township was prohibited from issuing railroad aid bonds within one year after the organization of the county. The date of the bonds charged a purchaser with notice of their invalidity and they could not be validated by any subsequent act of ratification or estoppel. (1901) Sage v. Fargo Township, 107 Fed. 383. $15,000, Faulkenstein Township, Kan. Actual loss. Township bonds issued in exchange for an agree- ment to build a sugar mill were void. Purchaser bound to take notice of the township records, and to examine their legality. (1896) Faulkenstein Township v. Fitch, 43 Pac. 276. $15,000, Ingalls Township, Kan. Actual loss. Refunding town bonds issued pursuant to a vote and canvassed by an unauthorized board were void. Original bonds issued in aid of private enterprise were void. (1897) Brown v. Ingalls Township, 81 Fed. 485. MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 43 $50,000, Iola, City of, Kan. Actual loss. A special act legalizing a certain election and au- thorizing the city to issue bonds in aid of a private enterprise was unconstitutional and bonds were void. Innocent purchaser was bound to take notice of want of power. (1873) National Bank v. City of Iola, 9 Kan. 689. , Johnson County, Kan. Actual loss. County railroad aid bonds otherwise void were not validated by a certain act changing the mode of levying and collecting taxes. (1874) January v. Johnson County, Fed. Cas. 7,219. , Kansas City, City of, Kan. No power to issue city bonds for paving streets without a petition signed by a majority of the owners abutting on the street. Issue enjoined. (1899) State ex rel. Miller v. City of Kansas City, 57 Pac. 118. , Kearney County, Kan. Statute prohibited counties from issuing school bonds within one year after organization. All purchasers charged with notice that bonds were issued within the year and bonds were void in hands of bona fide purchaser. Recitals did not cure utter want of power. (1893) Coffin v. Board of Commissioners of Kearney County, 57 Fed. 137. $400,000, Leavenworth, City of, Kan. Submission of proposition to voters to purchase or construct waterworks was dual and the election was void. Issue of bonds restrained. (1904) City of Leavenworth v. Wilson, 76 Pac. 400. $150,000, Miami, County of, Kan. Actual loss. Proposition submitted to voters of county failed to name the recipient of railroad aid. Bonds void. (1873) Missouri River, Ft. S. & G. R. Co. v. County of Miami, 12 Kan. 230. $11,000, Neosho Falls, City of, Kan. Actual loss. City bonds issued to aid private enterprise (woolen mill) were ultra vires and void. (1876) McConnell v. Hamm, 16 Kan. 228. 44 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID $5,000, Nuckolls County, School District No. 9 of, Kan. Actual loss. School district having only three legal voters in it issued bonds to build schoolhouse without a request signed by five legal voters or notice of election as required by statute. Such bonds were void in hands of innocent purchaser. Slate ex rel. Phillips v. School District No. 9, Nuckolls County, 7 N. W. 315. $6,000, Osawkee Township, Kan. Act providing for issuance of "relief bonds" was not for a public purpose and was unconstitutional. Issue enjoined. (1875) State ex rel. Griffith v. Osawkee Township, 14 Kan. 418. 511,000, Oswego Township, Kan. Actual loss. Township was entitled to have railroad aid bonds cancelled as they exceeded debt limit. Had been regis- tered by state auditor upon a fraudulent certificate of indebted- ness. (1890) Wilson v. Union Savings Assn., 42 Fed. 421. $10,000, Oxford, Township of, Kan. Actual loss. Township bonds issued to aid private enter- prise in building bridge were void. Statute requiring thirty days' notice of election was violated by giving only eighteen days' notice and as the defect appeared upon the face of the bonds, the holder was not an innocent purchaser. (1876) George v. Township of Oxford, 16 Kan. 72. Same issue held void in Crow v. Oxford, 119 U. S. 215 (1886), which held further that the certificate of the state auditor indorsed on each bond that it was "regularly and legally issued" did not aid the holder " because the bonds were not such as the auditor was authorized by that act to register and certify." Same issue also held void in McClure v. Township of Oxford, 94 U. S. 429 (1876). $2,913, Shawnee County, Kan. Actual loss. Power to issue county courthouse warrants con- ferred no authority to issue bonds for such purpose. The void bonds were not legalized by curative legislative act. (1863) Shawnee County v. Carter, 2 Kan. 115. $150,000, Spring Valley Township, Kan. Actual loss. Township railroad aid bonds which lacked signa- MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 45 ture of county clerk were void. The certificate of registration by state auditor was not conclusive of validity. Not estopped by recital in bonds. (1884) Bissel v. Spring Valley Township, 110 U. S. 162. $100,000, Topeka, City of, Kan. Actual loss. City bonds issued as a donation to a manufactur- ing enterprise were void because the act relied upon was uncon- stitutional. (1874) Loan Association v. Topeka, 87 U. S. 655. KENTUCKY $6,000, Covington, City of, Ky. Failed to submit proposition for issuance of city street im- provement bonds to voters. Permission to issue denied. (1896) City of Covington v. McKenna, 99 Ky. 508; 36 S. W. 518. $67,350, Daviess County, Ky. Actual loss. County judge was authorized by election to issue $250,000 county railroad aid bonds but he fraudulently overissued the bonds to the extent of $67,350. Overissue was void even as against a purchaser before maturity for value without notice. Certificate of legality of county judge was of no effect. (1886) Daviess County v. Dickinson, 117 U. S. 657. $4,000, Fordsville School District, Ky. School district bonds issued without vote of legal voters as required by statute were void but holders were allowed to follow proceeds in subsequent action. (1905) Board of Trustees of Fordsville v. Postel, 88 S. W. 1065. $250,000, Green County, Kentucky. Actual loss. Railroad aid bonds. Persons must take notice of the terms of subscription, and also that railroad was not fully constructed. Payment of interest on the bonds by the county for some years would not validate them. Were void in hands of bona fide purchaser. (1903) Green County v. Shortell, 75 S. W. 251. $50,000, Lexington, City of, Ky. Issue of city school bonds enjoined because there was lack of statutory authority for submitting question to voters, and such 46 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID election could not be validated by a subsequent special statute. (1900) Berkley v. Board of Education, 58 S. W. 506. $1,000,000, Louisville, City of, Ky. Issuance of city bonds for park purposes enjoined because officials failed to submit proposition to voters. (1896) Belknap v. City of Louisville, 99 Ky. 474; 36 S. W. 1118. $500,000, Louisville, City of, Ky. Injunction granted against issue of city bonds to allow recan- vass of votes. (1901) City of Louisville v. Board of Park Commis- sioners, 65 S. W. 860. $100,000, Montgomery County, Ky. Subscription for county railroad aid bonds enjoined because the statute was repealed by the constitution and because the debt limit would be exceeded. (1901) Whitney v. Kentucky Mid- land Ry. Co., 63 S.W.24. , Newport, City of, Ky. Issue of city school bonds enjoined because debt limit would be exceeded. (1900) Broad v. Board of Education, 57 S. W. 612. $25,000, Parkland, Town of, Ky. Special charter amending charter of town was either uncon- stitutional or misleading and issuance of street bonds pursuant thereto were enjoined. (1889) Town of Parkland v. Gains, 88 Ky. 562; 11 S. W. 649. LOUISIANA $50,000, Baton Rouge, City of, La. Actual loss. City ordinance authorizing railroad aid bonds failed to provide means of payment of principal and interest. Not ratified. Void in hands of innocent holder. (1884) Knox v. City of Baton Rouge, 36 La. An. 427. $25,000, Donaldsonville, Town of, La. Partial loss. Town bonds issued for general purposes were valid only to the extent of provision made for their payment by ordinance or resolution and bona fide holder could not collect MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 47 any further sum. (1881) Oubre v. Town of Donaldsonville, 33 La. An. 386. $30,450, Iberville, Parish of, La. Actual loss. Police jury had no lawful authority to issue parish bonds to purchase slaves employed in building levee. Were void. (1871) Breauz v. Parish of Iberville, 23 La. An. 232. , Iberville, Parish of, La. Actual loss. Police jury of parish had no authority to issue road and bridge bonds. Were void. (1871) Marionneaux v. Parish of Iberville, 23 La. An. 251. $39,600, Plaqueminer, Parish of, La. Actual loss. Parish bonds issued by fraud and gross careless- ness without authority in exchange for void warrants, were void. Holder charged with notice of facts attending issuance. (1879) Johnson v. Butler, 31 La. An. 770. $1,500, Red River, Parish of, La. Actual loss. Courthouse bonds issued by parish were void because police jury failed to pass ordinance as required by stat- ute. (1877) Lisso v. Parish of Red River, 29 La. An. 590. $50,000, St. Bernard, Parish of, La. Police jury of parish had no authority to issue road bonds. Issue enjoined. (1904) Favalora v. Police Jury of Parish of St. Bernard, 36 So. 467. $260,000, Shreveport, City of, La. Actual loss. Lack of statutory authority for city to issue rail- road aid bonds. Were void. (1884) Scott's Exrs. v. City of Shreveport, 20 Fed. 714. Same issue held void even in hands of innocent purchaser, Lewis v. City of Shreveport, 108 U. S. 282 (1883). Nor could the city validate the bonds by ratification without legislative authority. $13,000, Shreveport, City of, La. Actual loss. No charter power for city to issue bonds to pur- chase stock in gas lighting plant. Ordinance creating debt failed to impose a tax for its extinguishment. Were invalid even 48 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID in hands of bona fide purchaser. (1 877) Wilson v. City of Shreve- port, 29 La. An. 673. $4,600, Tensas, Parish of, La. Actual loss. There was no express or implied legislative au- thority for parish to issue refunding bonds to take up outstand- ing levee warrants. Were void in hands of bona fide purchaser. (1872) Police Jury v. Britton, 15 Wall. 566. MARYLAND $10,000, Cumberland, City of, Md. Failed to submit proposition for city bridge bonds to voters. Issue enjoined. (1871) Mayor, etc., of Cumberland v. Magruder, 34 Md. 381. $12,500, Prince George County, Md. Actual loss. Statute authorizing county bonds contained a defect which rendered them nonnegotiable. Bona fide purchaser lost. (1898) Duckett v. National Bank, 88 Md. 8; 41 Atl. 161. $25,000, Talbot County, Md. Issue of county railroad bonds enjoined because special act was unconstitutional, because the railroad had become insol- vent prior to the passage of the act. (1895) Baltimore & E. S. R. Co. v. Spring, 80 Md. 510; 31 Atl. 208. MASSACHUSETTS $20,000,000, Boston, City of, Mass. Issue enjoined. Act authorizing the city of Boston to issue bonds and lend the proceeds on mortgage to the owners of land, the buildings upon which were burned by the great fire of 1872, was unconstitutional, being for a private and not public pur- pose. (1873) Lowell v. City of Boston, 111 Mass. 454. MICHIGAN $8,500, Ashley, Village of, Mich. Actual loss. A resolution of the village council authorizing president and clerk to sign waterworks bonds did not authorize president to deliver the bonds which were void in hands of bona fide holder. (1892) Portsmouth Savings Bank v. Village of Ash- ley, 91 Mich. 670; 52 N, W, 74. Slate Alabama Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Florida Georgia Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Jersey New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oregon Pennsylvania South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin County City $200,000 : 1 10,000 j 1 $60,000 1 2 | 54,500 117,000 I 3 I 3 1,741,000 ! 5 505,000 2 ! 2 5,357,500 11 42,000 j 2 146,000 592,913 317,350 13 , 3,190,000 2 187,000 12,500 219,000 176,000 50,000 323,000 ; 10,000 1 1 : 1 225,000 565,000 187,500 21,250 2 | 2 - 175,000 5 ! 7 ' 246,000 186,000 i 4 9 j 65,000 2 276,000 2 2 Total 105,000 4 I 4 i 214,091 I 3 11,560 10,000 400,000 30,500 355,000 107,250 10,000 25,000 3 76,000 $9,793,104 64 84 2,000,000 10,000 260,000 245,000 2,000 66,000 20,000 234,115 $9,629,925 6 8 3 3 4 6 5 5 1 1 3 3 2 2 1 5 1 6 ! 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 9 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 68 77 TABLE II.— HELD VOID See explanation of Table on page ( Town, Parish Village, Borough School District Levee $61,000 709,000 34,358 29,767 211,000 $400,000* 2 4 ),000 1 1 101,150 1,000 95,000 141,000 170,000 19 23 ! $88,800 4 4 2,500 2 2 j 648,000 1 1 2 | 3 ! j | i .... I 120,700 6 ; 8 | 3 j 3 6 i 7 ! I 1 I 1 4 | 4 2 ! 4 10,800 5,000 ; i i 4,000 ill 23,000 950,000 90,000 25,000 40,100 11,000 101,000 10,000 7,000 $2,810,375 4 5 2 9 [ ~ 1 17 22 4 4 i 2 3 2 1 3 1 1 4 4 1 1 1 4 86 101 13,500 I 1 4,000 I 1 2,500 9,500 800 $203,400 9,750 3 4 15 5,700 20,000 1,400 1,500 4,600 $198,650 22 1 ! 3 1 1 27 Railroad Aid S( Pit $200,000 1 64,000 ! 2 154,000 2 $10,000 1,631,500 30 35 2,500 130,000 3 3 34,358 219,000 4 10 147,967 560,000 5 7 170,000 317,350 2 2 54,000 310,000 2 2 37,500 I 1 90,000 541,000 6 745,000 ! 10 12 I 13,500 220,000 ; 4 895,000 270,000 301,000 400,000 40,100 576,000 241,800 16 \ 21 6 j 6 I 5 j 6 i ! 2 ! 3 2 3 8 I 8 9,750 15,000 5,700 20,000 $8,344,250 117 1,400 148 1,500 $485,675 * Irrigation district. t Irrigation. i Levee district. 1 TABLE II.— HELD VOID See explanation of Table on page 6 Levee $400,000* 648,000 1 1 Railroad Aid School Purposes Waterworks, Gas and Electric Lighting j Plants Streets, Bridges, Wards, Parks, Buildings and Public Improvements Private Enterprise Refunding General Indebtedness Levee and Irrigation Districts S200.000 1 64,000 2 154,000 2 $30,000 1 1 $30,000 2 2 $10,000 1 1 $25,000 1 1,655,000 3 3 1 1 5,000 1 1 1,631,500 30 35 130,000 219,000 560,000 317,350 310,000 35 2,500 2 2 3 34,358 2 3 10 147,967 8 10 7 170,000 3 4 2 54,000 2 2 2 S5,000 $536,000 $500 1 1 49,000 3 3 $400,000f 2 4 23,800 1 3 65,000 2 2 23,000 1 1 7,510,000 3 5 64S.0OOJ 1 1 99,000 2 2 26,000 1 1 183,500 4 6 2,913 1 1 211,000 7 7 30,000 3 3 30,000 1 1 13,000 1 1 1,500 1 2 4,600 1 1 25,000 1 1 44,200t 2 2 37,500 1 1 90,000 2 2 541,000 6 8 745,000 10 12 13,500 1 8,500 1 1 1,000 1 1 2,000 1 1 24,250 2 3 160,300 3 3 2,000 1 1 6,000 1 1 9,000 1 1 200,000 1 1 21,000 1 1 220,000 4 7 9,750 4 5 4,000 1 1 2 31,000 2 3 895,000 16 21 270,000 6 6 15,000 1 1 5,700 1 3 301,000 5 6 20,000 11 2,000 1 1 400,000 2 40,100 2 3 3 1,400 1 1 576,000 8 8 225,000 1 1 5,000 1 1 141,560 3 4 10,000 1 1 51,000 1 1 14,091 1 1 98,000 1 1 5,700 1 1 - 78,500 2 3 2,000,000 1 1 241,800 4 7 104,000 3 3 5,000 1 2 154,250 6 6 1,500 1 1 4,600 3 5 $8,344,250 117 148 $485,675 28 36 | $252,100 11 12 9,315 30,000 2 $2,446,679 27 9,500 2 2 '40,500 135,000 91,000 2 2 1 1 3 3 66,000 1 15,800 1 35 ;$2,584,000 18 9 $980,300 16 20 i $8,185,600 24 26 ict. t Irrigation. t Levee district. MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 49 $100,000, Bay City, Mich. Act authorizing railroad aid bonds was unconstitutional be- cause not for a public purpose. City could compel cancella- tion of its bonds deposited with state treasurer. (1871) People ex rel. Bay City v. State Treasurer, 23 Mich. 499. $100,000, Bay County, Mich. Issue of county road bonds enjoined. Statute authorizing issue of bonds to mature in fifteen years was violated by a vote on a proposition to issue bonds maturing in thirty years. Bonds could not be validated by subsequent legislative act. (1901) Shearer v. Board of Supervisors of Bay County, 87 N. W. 789. $15,800, Bellaire, Village of, Mich. No statutory authority for village to borrow money for main- tenance of waterworks, nor had council determined amount to be raised for construction of waterworks. Hence election on prop- osition was void. Issue restrained. (1908) Bichardi v. Vil- lage of Bellaire, 116 N. W. 1066. $300, Blanchard, Village of, Mich. Actual loss. Village bonds issued for fire apparatus were void for failure to submit proposition to vote of people. Bona fide purchaser not protected by recital "issued in conformity with the general laws of the State." (1890) Spitzer v. Village of Blanchard, 46 N. W. 400. $35,000, Cheboygan County, Mich. Statute required payment of bonds within fifteen years. Elec- tion authorizing county courthouse bonds payable in thirty years was void. Issue enjoined. (1894) McMullen v. Ingham, 61 N. E. 260; 120 Mich. 608. $10,000, Clarendon, Township of, Mich. The township could not be compelled to issue its bonds in ac- cordance with a subscription to railroad aid because there was no statutory authority authorizing the issuance of such bonds. (1889) Young v. Clarendon, 132 U. S. 340. $200,000, Detroit, City of, Mich. Issuance of city park bonds could not be compelled for lack of 50 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID statutory authority. (1873) People ex rel. Board of Park Com- missioners v. Common Council of Detroit, 28 Mich. 228. $130,000, Grand Rapids, City of, Mich. Issue enjoined. Resolution of council to issue bonds for erec- tion of a lighting plant insufficient without vote of electors, as provided by city charter. (1897) Farr v. City of Grand Rapids, 112 Mich. 99; 70 N. W. 411. $150,000, Ironwood, City of, Mich. Actual loss. City bonds to pay floating indebtedness stated that they were issued under a certain act. As that act provided for the election of a new set of city officials, such officers and not the old officials should have executed the bonds and the bonds were invalid even in the hands of bona fide purchasers. The illegality was disclosed on the face of the bonds. (1896) Man- hattan Company v. City of Ironwood, 74 Fed. 535. Recovery of purchase money was allowed in Chelsea Savings Bank v. City of Ironwood (1904), 130 Fed. 410. $1,000, Lamotte, Town of, Mich. Actual loss. Township board had no authority without a vote of the electors to issue road bonds. Were void. Interest had been paid but bona fide holder must take notice of lack of authority. (1890) Bogart v. Township of Lamotte, 79 Mich. 294; 44 N. W. 612. $2,000, Mecosta, Village of, Mich. Actual loss. Village bonds to aid a private enterprise, a grist mill, were invalid. Plaintiff was bona fide holder. (1901) Thompson v. Village of Mecosta, 86 N. W. 1044. $10,000, Paw Paw, Township of, Mich. Judge was compelled to issue injunction against issue of il- legal railroad aid bonds by township. (1898) Dodge v. Van Buren, 76 N. W. 315. $37,500, Port Huron, City of, Mich. Actual loss. Act authorizing cities to issue railroad aid bonds was unconstitutional and bonds issued thereunder were void. (1873) Thomas v. City of Port Huron, 27 Mich. 320. MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 51 $50,000, St. Croix County, Mich. Issue of county buildings bonds enjoined. because resolution failed to provide a tax to meet payment of principal and interest. (1900) Kyes v. St. Croix County, 83 N. W. 637. , Salem, Township of, Mich. Act authorizing municipalities to aid railroads by issuance of bonds was unconstitutional because it would be assisting a private enterprise. Railroad could not compel township to issue its bonds. (1870) People ex rel. D. & H. R. Co. v. Township Board of Salem, 20 Mich. 452. $10,000, Shiawassee County, Mich. Actual loss. County board of supervisors had no statutory power to borrow money by issue of notes to defray current ex- penses. Holder charged with knowledge of statutory or organic law. (1908) McCurdy v. Shiawassee County, 118 N. W. 625. MINNESOTA , Detroit, Village of, Minn. Issue of village bonds (object not stated) enjoined after be- ing authorized by election because petition was signed by only twenty-four instead of twenty-five qualified petitioners. Ham- ilton v. Village of Detroit (1901), 88 N. W. 419. $2,106,000, Duluth, City of, Minn. Form of ballot did not fairly submit proposition for issuance of city bonds for construction or erection of water and light plant. Election set aside, issue enjoined. (1895) Thruelsen v. Mayor of Duluth, 3 N. W. 714; 61 Minn. 48. $300,000, Duluth, City of, Minn. Issue of city waterworks bonds enjoined. Authority given by previous election was superseded by subsequent election. (1898) Moore v. City of Duluth, 76 N. W. 1022. $3,000, Duluth, Township of, Minn. Actual loss. Statutory authority for town to issue bridge bonds only, conferred no authority to issue bonds for construct- ing and improving roads and bridges. Bonds for such purpose were void and were not validated by a special act, which 52 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID impliedly exempted such bonds from its provisions. (1906) Clagett v. Duluth Township, 143 Fed. 824. SI 5,000, East Grand Forks, City of, Minn. Issue of city waterworks bonds enjoined, being in excess of debt limit. (1904) Purcell v. City of East Grand Forks, 98 N. W. 351. $40,000, Elgin, Town of, Minn. Actual loss. Same facts as in Winona & St. Peter Railroad v. Plainview. (1892) Winona & St. Peter Railroad v. Elgin, 143 U. S. 371. , Plainview, Town of, Minn. Act unconstitutional. Issue of town railroad aid bonds en- joined. (1880) Harrington v. Town of Plainview, 6 N. W. 777. $50,000, Plainview, Town of, Minn. Actual loss. Railroad aid. Statute authorizing taxpayers of a town to sanction railroad bond issue was unconstitutional, be- cause it authorized persons other than the electors of a town or the officers chosen by such electors to incur indebtedness. The town issued bonds to the railroad and the latter sold them to bona fide purchasers. The purchasers brought suit against the town and recovered judgment for the amount of the bonds. The town then claiming the bonds were invalid and illegally issued brought this action against the railroad which was sus- tained. (1892) Winona & St. Peter Railroad v. Plainview, 143 U. S. 371. Same issue held void in Harrington v. Plainview Railroad Company, 27 Minn. 224. , Ramsey County, Minn. Actual loss. Act authorizing county commissioners to issue county orders for street improvements gave them no power to issue county bonds, and such were invalid in the hands of any purchaser. (1865) Goodnow v. Commissioners of Ramsey County, 11 Minn. 31. $2,000, Rocksbury, Town of, Minn. Actual loss. Town bonds for general purposes exceeded debt limit and were void. Defect not cured by a recital in the bonds MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 53 of compliance with all legal requirements. Interest had been paid. A public record determined the amount of the authorized issue which bona fide holder should have taken notice of. (1905) Corbet v. Town of Rocksbury, 103 N. W. 11. $40,000, Sauk Rapids, Village of, Minn. Special act authorizing village to issue bonds to develop water- power enterprise was unconstitutional because the object was partly public and partly private and could not be distinguished. Nature of action not stated. (1887) Coates v. Campbell, 35 N. W. 366. $21,250, Stillwater, City of, Minn. Actual loss. Action on certificates of indebtedness issued for street improvements, failed for want of power in the city to issue them. (1892) Bangor Savings Bank v. City of Stillwater, 49 Fed. 721. MISSISSIPPI $100,000, Aberdeen, City of, Miss. Actual loss. Lack of any charter or legislative authority for city to issue railroad aid bonds. Were not validated by curative act. (1887) Katzenberger v. City of Aberdeen, 121 U. S. 172. $125,000, Carroll County, Miss. Issue of county railroad aid bonds enjoined because consent of two-thirds of qualified voters as required by constitution meant two-thirds of voters of county and not of those voting only. (1874) Hawkins v. Carroll County, 50 Miss. 735. In a different suit regarding the same bonds Carroll County v. Smith (1884), 111 U. S. 556, the issue was held valid on the ground that the constitution referred to the voters actually voting instead of all voters of the county qualified to vote. $37,000, Clarksdale, Town of, Miss. Failed to publish notice of election for issuance of town water- works, sewerage and electric light bonds. Issue enjoined. (1900) Town of Clarksdale v. Broaddus, 28 So. 954. -, Columbus, Town of, Miss. Actual loss. Mayor and alderman had no charter power to 54 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID issue town railroad aid bonds. Void though held by innocent purchaser. Recital that bonds were issued " under and pursuant to the constitution and laws of Mississippi, the charter of the town of Columbus, and ordinances passed by the mayor and alderman and authorized by a vote of the people of said town at a special election, etc.," did not estop town from pleading il- legality. (1877) Sykes v. Mayor, etc., of Columbus, 55 Miss. 115. $8,000, Hazlehurst, City of, Miss. Lack of authority for city to issue bonds for purchase of park. Issue enjoined. (1910) City of Hazlehurst v. Mayer, 51 So. 890. $75,000, Holly Springs, City of, Miss. Actual loss. Railroad aid bonds issued by city pursuant to a special election were void even when held by bona fide pur- chaser because of total lack of statutory power for that pur- pose. City was not estopped by recitals on face of bonds nor were they ratified by a special act of legislature. (1885) Hayes v. Holly Springs, 114 U. S. 120. $75,000, Madison County, Miss. Actual loss. Majority of "all legal voters" meant all of county and not those alone who actually voted. County could compel cancellation of railroad aid bonds although it had paid interest thereon. ( 1880) Board of Supervisors of Madison County v. Paxton, 57 Miss. 701. , Okolona, Town of, Miss. Actual loss. Town railroad aid bonds payable twenty years after date violated statute requiring payment within ten years from date and were void. Recitals were not conclusive in favor of purchaser for value. (1880) Woodruff v. Okolona, 57 Miss. 806. $16,000, Okolona, Town of, Miss. Actual loss. Statute authorizing issuance of railroad aid bonds by town payable within ten years was violated by bonds payable from eleven to seventeen years after their date and were void in hands of innocent holder. (1892) Barnum v. Okolona, 148 U. S. 393. MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 55 $150,000, Pontotoc County, Miss. Actual loss. No legislative authority for board of supervisors of county to issue railroad aid bonds. Were void in hands of holder for value. (1880) Wells v. Supervisors, 102 U. S. 625. $1,500, Rienzi, Village of, Miss. Issue of village school bonds enjoined because of failure of proper number of "electors" to vote in favor of the proposition. (1906) Greene v. Village of Rienzi, 40 So. 17. $125,000, Rosedale, Town of, Miss. Actual loss. Town railroad aid bonds issued on condition of completion of road by certain time, were nullified for failure to comply with condition. Being void could be cancelled. Clark v. Town of Rosedale, 12 So. 600. $100,000, Vicksburgh, City of, Miss. City bond issue to take up already existing indebtedness which exceeded the limit was unauthorized and issue was en- joined. (1905) Smith v. City of Vicksburgh, 38 So. 301. MISSOURI $90,000, Bates, County of, Mo. Actual loss. Authority given by voters of county to subscribe to stock of a certain railroad did not authorize the issuance of bonds to a different railroad although the latter represented a consolidation with the former. Such bonds were void in hands of bona fide holder. (1877) County of Bates v. Winters, 97 U. S. 83. Same issue again held void in Harshman v. Bates County (1875), 92 U. S. 569, and Edwards v. Bates County (1902), 117 Fed. 526. $12,000, Bethany, City of, Mo. Proposition submitted to voters for the issuance of city bonds for constructing a public building and improving waterworks and electric light plant could not be submitted as one proposi- tion to be answered "yes" or "no" and bonds for such purpose could not be registered. (1905) State ex rel. City of Bethany v. Allen, 85 S. W. 531. 56 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID $40,000, Centralia, City of, Mo. Mandamus to register city waterworks bonds would not lie because the mayor's signature to the council's journal was in- sufficient to show his approval of the ordinance and the coun- cil's minutes showing population were insufficient. (1908) State ex rel. City of Centralia v. Wilder, 109 S. W. 574. $13,500, Charington, School District No. 3 of, Mo. Actual loss. Records of school board failed to show com- pliance with statute and bonds exceeded debt limit; recitals in the bonds of legality did not give rise to an estoppel in favor of bona fide purchaser before maturity, nor did the fact that the money was used in the construction of the schoolhouse render the bonds enforceable. (1903) Thornburgh v. School District No. S, 75 S. W. 81. $100,000, Chillicothe, City of, Mo. Power to issue bonds for erection or construction of a water- works and electric light plant conveyed no authority to issue city bonds to maintain and operate the same. Mandamus to compel state auditor to register such bonds denied. (1906) State ex rel. City of Chillicothe v. Wilder, 98 S. W. 465. $190,000, Clark County, Mo. Actual loss. County railroad aid bonds issued to agent of county to be delivered by him conditionally were fraudulently delivered by him. Holder was not bona fide purchaser and could not recover. (1882) Whitford v. Clark County, 13 Fed. 644 and 837. $9,000, Clarksville, City of, Mo. City was without power to issue its negotiable bonds for im- proving streets and wharves and buying cemetery and same were void but holder could recover for money originally paid for them. (1880) Gause v. City of Clarksville, 1 Fed. 353; same case, Fed. Cas. 5,276 (1879). $10,000, Columbia, City of, Mo. Waterworks and electric light bonds were part of city in- debtedness and proposed issue of city sewer bonds would there- MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 57 fore exceed the limit of indebtedness. Registration denied. State ex rel. City of Columbia v. Wilder, 94 S. W. 495. $60,000, Daviess County, Mo. Actual loss. County railroad aid bonds held void in hands of bona fide purchaser for value because an agreement made by inhabitants along the route to tax themselves could not make a bonded indebtedness for the whole county. (1880) Ogden v. County of Daviess, 102 U. S. 634. , Lafayette County, Mo. Actual loss. County railroad aid bonds were void in hands of bona fide purchaser because railroad had no charter authority to construct road in that county and because the question of is- suance was never submitted to voters. (1875) Sherrard v. Lafayette County, Fed. Cas. 12,771. 8200,000, La Grange, City of, Mo. Actual loss. City bonds issued pursuant to a legislative act to aid a private enterprise were void as the act was unconstitu- tional. (1885) Cole v. LaGrange, 113 U. S. 1. $40,000, Lathrop, Town of, Mo. Actual loss. Did not appear that town railroad aid bonds were authorized by an election legally conducted in that there were no judges of election, no poll books were kept, no return of election to any officer of body authorized to declare the result, and no registration of voters had been made and certified or authenticated. Recitals did not protect innocent holder. (1873) Carpenter v. Inhabitants of Town of Lathrop, 51 Mo. 483. , Lincoln County, Mo. Actual loss. County bonds were void for failure to register in office of state auditor. (1883) Douglas v. Lincoln County, 5 Fed. 775. $21,000, Louisiana, City of, Mo. City refunding bonds were antedated to avoid effect of an act requiring registration by state officials. Bonds were void, but recovery of money paid was allowed. (1880) Louisiana v. Wood, 102 U. S. 294. 58 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID $175,000, Macon, County of, Mo. Actual loss. Bona fide holder of county railroad bonds could not compel levy of tax to pay interest because bonds were not authorized by two-thirds of qualified voters and because the tax would exceed the debt limit. (1874) State ex rel. Aull v. Short- ridge, 56 Mo. 126; same issue, State ex rel. Watkins v. Macon County (1878), 68 Mo. 29. $6,000, Marceline, City of, Mo. Actual loss. City electric lighting plant bonds exceeded debt limit and were void even in hands of bona fide holder, although the bonds had been registered by the state auditor, and his cer- tificate of regularity appeared on the bond. (1895) Prickett v. City of Marceline, 65 Fed. 469. $50,000, Marion, Township of, Mo. Actual loss. Railroad aid bonds issued by township were antedated to avoid necessity of registering with state auditor, being dated the day of the subscription instead of the day of actual issuance. Were void in hands of innocent purchaser. (1879) Anthony v. County of Jasper, 101 U. S. 693. $30,000, Memphis, Town of, Mo. Actual loss. Railroad aid bonds were void. Act unconstitu- tional. Power of a town to subscribe for stock in a railroad com- pany did not include the power to create a debt and to issue negotiable bonds representing it in order to pay for the subscrip- tion. (1890) Hill v. City of Memphis, 134 U. S. 198. Same issue held void in lower court because twelve days instead of thirty days' notice of election was given. 23 Fed. 872. Same is- sue, Dodge v. City of Memphis (1892), 51 Fed. 165, held void. $50,000, Moberly, Town of, Mo. Actual loss. Railroad aid bonds issued by town pursuant to a statute authorizing such bonds unon the assent of a majority of the qualified voters were void and the act unconstitutional be- cause the constitution required the assent of two-thirds of such voters. (1880) Jarrolt v. Moberly, 103 U. S. 580. $10,000, Nevada, City of, Mo. Actual loss. Railroad aid bonds of city were void in hands of MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 59 innocent purchaser because act relied upon requiring assent of only a majority of qualified voters instead of two-thirds was un- constitutional. (1892) Morton v. City of Nevada, 52 Fed. 350. $50,000, Platte, County of, Mo. Actual loss. Railroad aid bonds of county issued by taxable inhabitants of a strip through which the road ran were void for lack of statutory authority. An act attempting to legalize the illegal election was unconstitutional. Bona fide purchaser was charged to know the effect of recitals. (1880) Dodge v. County of Platte, 82 N. Y. 218. Same issue held void (1890) Deland v. Platte County, 54 Fed. 823. Recitals did not bind county. Nor could they be ratified because there was no power to perform the original act. ■ — , St. Joseph, City of, Mo. Actual loss. No statutory authority for issue of school bonds by city. (1880) Erwin v. St. Joseph Board of Public Schools, 12 Fed. 680. $3,500, Salem School District, Mo. Issue enjoined. Notice of election failed to state place for elec- tion. Statutory authority to issue bonds to purchase a site for a school building did not convey authority even by vote to erect school on old site. (1909) Martin v. Bennett, 122 S. W. 779. $70,000, Saline County, Mo. Statute authorizing issue of railroad aid bonds by county when sanctioned by a majority vote "specifying the amount" was not complied with by a, vote upon a proposition for or against an amount "not exceeding $70,000." Issuance could not be compelled. (1870) State v. Saline County Court, 45 Mo. 242. , Sniabar Township, Mo. Actual loss. Township railroad aid act was unconstitutional and bonds issued thereunder were void into whosoever hands they came. (1878) Webb v. Lafayette County, 67 Mo. 353. MONTANA $30,000 Silverbow County, School District No. 1 of, Mont. Notice of school election to issue bonds failed to designate a 60 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID polling place. Proceedings illegal. (1901) Hauswirth v. Muel- ler, 64 Pac. 324. $280,000, Helena, City of, Mont. Issue enjoined. Constitution authorizing city bond issue when necessary to construct a sewerage system did not author- ize cities having sewerage systems at time of its adoption to issue bonds. (1896) Palmer v. City of Helena, 47 Pac. 209. $10,000, Yellowstone County, Mont. The word "bridge" included the approach thereto. Hence indebtedness for both would exceed the limit and issue of county bonds to pay cost was enjoined. (1909) Jenkins v. Newman, 101 Pac. 625. NEBRASKA $6,000, Adams County, Juniata Precinct, Neb. Actual loss. No authority for county to issue bonds to aid building of grist mill. Was not a work of internal improvement and bonds were void. (1884) State ex rel. Bowen v. Adams County, 20 N. W. 96. , Ainsworth Precinct, Neb. Precinct had no statutory authority for issuing bonds in aid of state normal school. Registration by auditor denied. (1903) State ex rel. Ainsworth Precinct v. Weston, 96 N. W. 668. • , Beatrice, City of, Neb. Actual loss. Delay in issuing city railroad aid bonds ren- dered interest coupons attached void until date of actual de- livery, even in hands of innocent purchaser. (1895) Brinkworth v. Grable, 63 N. W. 952; 45 Neb. 647. , Beatrice, City of, Neb. Power to issue city bonds for curbing and guttering streets could not be issued for curbing and guttering intersection of streets. Registration denied. (1889) State ex rel. City of Bea- trice v. Benton, 41 N. W. 1068. $53,000, Butler County, Neb. Proposition submitted to voters of county failed to designate MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 61 donee of railroad aid bonds but was in alternative, — to issue to one or to other of two corporations. Certification denied. (1887) State ex rel. Gardner v. Roggen, 34 N. W. 108. , Butler County, Neb. Actual loss. Proposition submitted to voters in alternative to issue county bonds to one or other railroad was illegal. Plain- tiff was entitled to enjoin the certification of the bonds issued. (1883) Spurck v. Lincoln & N. W. R. Co., 15 N. W. 701. $53,000, Butler County, Neb. Actual loss. County railroad aid bonds were unenforceable for failure to have registered and certified as provided by law. (1905) Frank v. Butler County, Neb., 139 Fed. 119. $87,000, Dixon County, Neb. Actual loss. County railroad aid bonds violated constitution and were without legislative authority. Bona fide holder was not protected by reason of recitals in the bonds nor by the certif- icates of state officers on the back of the bonds. A recital of facts which the corporate officers had no authority to determine or a recital of matters of law did not estop the county. (1884) Dixon County v. Field, 111 U. S. 83. Same issue held void for exceeding debt limit (1893) Hedges v. Dixon County, 150 U. S. 182. $49,000, Franklin County, Neb. Could not compel registration of county bonds issued to pay general indebtedness because they would exceed debt limit. (1885) State ex rel. Wiant v. Babcock, 24 N. W. 556. , Fremont, City of, Neb. Twenty days' publication of notice of election to vote on city water and paving bonds violated statute requiring four weeks' publication. Registration denied. (1889) State ex rel. City of Fremont v. Babcock, 41 N. W. 450. $4,000, Grant, Village of, Neb. Actual loss. These village bonds were issued in aid of pri- vate waterworks and were void. The bonds referred to a stat- ute as authority, but which did not convey authority. Court 62 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID said: "The bonds, therefore, bear upon their face ample evi- dence of their own invalidity, and no one can claim to be a bona fide purchaser of a bond which carries on its face indubitable evidence of its unlawful character." (1904) Village of Grant v. Sherrill, 98 N. W. 681. $25,000, Lincoln, City of, Neb. State auditor not authorized to register refunding bonds to fund city railroad aid bonds not registered. (1886) State ex rel. City of Lincoln v. Babcock, 19 Neb. 223. , Lincoln County, Neb. Actual loss. County commissioners had no statutory au- thority to issue jail bonds and a vote of people could not confer authority. Bonds were void. (1885) State ex rel. Grady v. Commissioners of Lincoln County, 25 N. W. 91. , Lincoln, School District of, Neb. Issue of school district enjoined for failure to comply with statute requiring petition to be filed, signed by one-third of the qualified voters as a condition precedent to election. (1894) Fullerton v. School District of Lincoln, 59 N. W. 896. $40,000, Nebraska City Precinct, Neb. Actual loss. Precinct was not legally organized; therefore a taxpayer could restrain the levy of taxes to pay principal and interest of bonds issued by it to aid railroad. Bonds were void. (1897) Morton v. Carlin, 51 Neb. 202; 70 N. W. 966. $14,800, Neligh, City of, Neb. Beet sugar factory was not an "internal improvement." Is- sue of city bonds for such purpose enjoined. (1890) Getchell v. Benton, 47 N. W. 468. $75,000, Norfolk, City of, Neb. Certificate of city indorsed on bonds of private waterworks company that city would pay interest was void being in excess of authority. (1901) Painter v. City of Norfolk, 87 N. W. 31. $200,000, Omaha, City of, Neb. Authority given by voters to buy land and erect a market MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 63 place did not authorize erection of market house on land of a public park. Issue enjoined. (1898) Tukey v. City of Omaha, 54 Neb. 370; 74 N. W. 613. $215,000, Omaha, School District of the City of, Neb. Proposition for city school bonds failed to receive a majority of all votes cast although the proposition received a majority vote on question submitted. Could not compel registration by state auditor. (1890) State ex rel. Board of Education v. Benton, 45 N. W. 794. $40,000, Otoe County, Neb. Actual loss. County railroad aid bonds held void. Proposi- tion submitted to voters failed to provide a tax to meet the lia- bility. Authority given by vote to subscribe to stock of railroad did not empower a donation of the bonds. (1877) Hamlin v. Meadville, 6 Neb. 227. $82,000, Otoe County, Neb. Could not compel state auditor to register county refunding bonds because county commissioners had no authority to call election. (1888) State ex rel. Otoe County v. Babcock, 37 N. W. 645. , Perkins County, Neb. Actual loss. County bonds issued to aid irrigation com- pany were void in hands of bona fide purchaser because notice of adoption of the proposition by voters was published only ten days instead of two weeks prior to date of bonds as required by statute. Recitals on face of bonds showed violation of statutory requirement. (1901) Wilbur v. Wyatt, 63 Neb. 261. $25,000, Plattsmouth, City of, Neb. Partial loss. City bonds to pay floating debts exceeded debt limit and were void. Tax to pay interest on street improvement bonds which exceeded the rate of levy prescribed by statute was enjoined by taxpayer. (1878) Wheeler v. City of Plattsmouth, 7 Neb. 270. But holder who had surrendered valid warrants could recover their value. City of Plattsmouth v. Fitzgerald (1880), 10 Neb. 401. 64 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID -, Richardson County, Neb. Special act authorizing county courthouse bonds was uncon- stitutional. Bonds were void and taxpayer could enjoin collec- tion of tax to pay interest thereon. (1879) Dundy v. Commis- sioners of Richardson County, 1 N. W. 565. , Richardson County, School District No. 56 of, Neb. Actual loss. School district bonds held void because special act authorizing issue was expressly forbidden by state constitu- tion. (1875) Clegg v. School District, 8 Neb. 178. $39,000, Seward County, Neb. Issue enjoined. Proposition in alternative to issue county bonds to one railroad or another was void. (1882) Jones v. HurVburt, 13 N. W. 5. , Seward County, Neb. Actual loss. Persons induced by fraud to sign petition for issue of county railroad aid bonds could withdraw their consents and the number remaining being insufficient, could compel can- cellation of the void bonds issued. Depot was located in section seventeen instead of section sixteen as agreed. (1890) Wullen- waher v. Dunnigan, 47 N. W. 420. $2,000, Shelton, Village of, Neb. Authority given by voters of village to issue bonds to two per- sons upon erection of a mill conferred no authority to issue the bonds to a company of which the two persons were members. Issue restrained. (1898) George v. Cleveland, 53 Neb. 716. $3,000, Sherman County, School District No. 4, Neb. Actual loss. No statutory authority to give bonds to con- tractor for erecting schoolhouse. Bona fide holder chargeable with notice. Recitals in bonds did not estop district. (1884) State ex rel. Otto v. School District No. 4, Sherman County, 20 N. W. 209. $3,500, Sherman County, School District No. 5, Neb. Actual loss. Bonds recited they were issued "in exchange for a school-house and site and buildings thereon." Held, not voted and issued for purpose of borrowing money as authorized MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 65 by statute and were void. School district refused to elect of- ficers thus also defeating recovery. (1891) State ex rel. Short v. Board of Commissioners of Sherman County, 31 Neb. 465. $1,250, Thurston County, School District No. 6 of, Neb. Actual loss. Power to compromise school indebtedness did not give power to issue bonds therefor. Holder had surrendered up valid warrants and now could not compel registration of his bonds. (1895) State ex rel. School District v. Moore, 45 Neb. 12. $2,000, Valley County, School District No. 7, Neb. Actual loss. School district having power to borrow money and issue registered bonds to erect schoolhouse could not issue negotiable bonds for such purpose. Such bonds were void even in hands of innocent purchaser. (1893) Ashuelot National Bank of Keene v. School District No. 7, Valley County, 56 Fed. 197. , Wayne County, Neb. County railroad aid bonds enjoined because they would have exceeded debt limit. (1878) Reineman v. Covington, C, & B. R. R. Co., 7 Neb. 310. $30,000, York, City of, Neb. Tax to pay interest on proposed city waterworks bonds would exceed constitutional limit. Registration refused. (1887) State ex rel. City of York v. Babcock, 31 N. W. 8. NEVADA $20,000, Elko School District, Nev. Writ to compel issuance of school district bonds denied. Stat- utory authority to issue school bonds which limited the annual levies on account of such bonds to $1,000 gave no authority to make the bonds maturing $1,000 each year for eight years and $1,500 during remaining eight years. (1909) State ex rel. Hen- derson Banking Co. v. McBride, 99 Pac. 705. NEW JERSEY $9,000, Bayonne, City of, N. J. Issue of city school bonds enjoined because of lack of charter authority, as the words "public buildings" did not include 66 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID schoolhouses. (1887) State v. City of Bayonne, 49 N. J. L. 308; 8 Atl. 114. $51,000, Bergen, County of, N. J. Actual loss. Financial officer used $51,000 of county bonds to secure personal loan $39,000 he signed' after his removal. As there were forgeries, innocent purchaser was not protected. As to the remaining $12,000, purchaser was bound to take notice that they exceeded debt limit. (1885) Merchants' Bank v. County of Bergen, 115 U. S. 384. $6,500, Cranbury Township, N. J. Issue of township school bonds enjoined as resolution did not clearly and unequivocally state purpose for which proceeds were to be used. (1896) State v. Board of Education of Cranbury Township, 33 Atl. 923. $225,000, Hudson County, N. J. Actual loss. Courthouse bonds issued by county exceeded debt limit and were void in hands of person taking with notice. (1877) Siedler v. Chosen Freeholders of Hudson, 39 N. J. L. 632. $5,000, Manchester, Township of, N. J. The petition, the resolution and the question submitted to voters failed to state the exact amount of the town highway bonds to be issued. An issue not to exceed a certain sum was insufficient. Issuance could not be compelled. (1898) Schultze v. Township Committee of Manchester Township, 61 N. J. L. 513; 40 Atl. 589. , Park Ridge, Borough of, N. J. Issue of borough road bonds enjoined because election was held eighteen instead of twenty days after approval by the mayor of the resolution. (1897) Mittag v. Mayor, etc., of Bor- ough of Park Ridge, 61 N. J. L. 51; 38 Atl. 750. $40,000, Paterson, City of, N. J. Authority to issue city bonds for sewer purposes should have been by ordinance and not by resolution. Issuance could not be compelled by mandamus. (1884) City of Paterson v. Barnet, 46 N. J. L. 62. MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 67 1 Riverton, Borough of, N. J. Petition submitted to borough issuing electric light bonds did not have requisite number of petitioners as some of the peti- tioners had withdrawn their consent. Election was void and proceedings illegal. (1895) Biddle v. Mayor, etc., of Borough of Riverton, 58 N. J. L. 289; 33 Atl. 279. $18,000, Winslow, Township of, N. J. Actual loss. Bond given to a person drafted into army. Township officials were not regularly authorized to issue these bonds. Not estopped by recitals. (1872) Hudson v. Inhabitants of Winslow, 35 N. J. L. 437. NEW YORK $30,000, Allegheny County, N. Y. Persons signing petition to grant railroad aid by town should have been allowed to withdraw their names from the petition. Bonds could not be issued. (1873) People ex rel. Angel v. Hatch, 1 Thomp. & C. 113. , Ancram, Town of, N. Y. Petitioners could not delegate power to sign the petition for railroad aid. Not sufficient consents. Proceedings irregular. (1872) People ex rel. Hoag v. Peck, 62 Barb. 545. , Andes, Town of, N. Y. Actual loss. Signatures to petition to secure issuance of town railroad aid bonds were conditional upon location of road in a certain place. The number of unconditional subscriptions was insufficient. Bonds were void in hands of innocent purchasers. (1883) Craig v. Town of Andes, 93 N. Y. 405. $30,000, Belport, Town of, N. Y. Failure of county judge to allow petitioners to withdraw, ren- dered decision authorizing railroad aid bonds void and proceed- ings irregular. (1873) People ex rel. Angel v. Hatch, 65 Barb. 430. $75,000, Brockport, Village of, N. Y. Actual loss. Village law requiring vote of electors on a "prop- osition" for issue of sewer bonds was violated by a vote upon 68 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID a "resolution" of the village trustees and bonds thereby issued were void even as against a bona fide holder. (1902) Village of Brock-port v. Green, 39 Misc. 231. $100,000, Canandaigua, Village of, N. Y. Resolution for issuing village paving bonds failed to state the number of annual installments in which the bonds were to be made payable by the village and to properly provide tax to pay interest and principal as required by statute. As the bonds were illegal, defendant's contract to purchase them could not be en- forced. (1904) Village of Canandaigua v. Hayes, 90 App. Div. 336. $40,000, Caneadea, Town of, N. Y. Actual loss. Petition for railroad aid bonds failed to show the application was made by a majority of taxpayers "exclusive of those taxed for dogs or highway tax only." Bonds were void in hands of bona fide purchaser as the defect was jurisdictional and patent on the record. (1878) Wilson v. Town of Caneadea, 15 Hun, 218. , Caneadea, Town of, N. Y. Actual loss. Court order authorizing issue of town railroad aid bonds failed to show an adjudication that a majority of tax- payers approved. Such bonds were void nor did payment of interest thereon amount to a ratification as there was a total want of authority to issue same. (1883) Cowdrey v. Town of Caneadea, 16 Fed. 532. $10,000, Douglas, Village of, N. Y. Actual loss. Village bonds in aid of manufacturing concern wer« void in hands of subsequent holder because legislative act authorizing municipal aid to a private corporation was unconsti- tutional. (1876) Weismer v. Village of Douglas, 64 N. Y. 91. $200,000, Ellicott, Town of, N. Y. Agreement made by town to deliver railroad aid bonds upon construction of road in certain place was nullified by the consti- tutional amendment prohibiting town from aiding railroads. Railroad could not enforce the agreement. (1880) Railroad Co. v. Falconer, 69 N. Y. 491; 103 U. S. 821. MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 69 $20,000, Fort Edward, Village of, N. Y. Issuance of village bonds to aid railroad could not be com- pelled because publication of notice of election for eleven days violated statute requiring publication for twelve days; also a requirement that a majority of the taxable inhabitants should consent meant all the inhabitants, and a majority of all those who attended the meeting was insufficient. (1876) Culver v. Village of Fort Edward, 8 Hun, 340. $50,000, Fort Edward, Village of, N. Y. An agreement by a municipality to sell bonds at par exclusive of interest was an agreement to sell for less than par and was void. The validity of the bonds was not passed upon. (1895) Village of Fort Edward v. Fish, 86 Hun, 548. $75,000, Genoa, Town of, N. Y. Actual loss. Construction of railroad was a condition pre- cedent to the issue of town bonds in aid thereof and bonds is- sued prior to happening of condition were void. Bona fide pur- chaser was chargeable with knowledge of statute. Town officers could not ratify the issue. (1901) Oswego County Savings Bank v. Town of Genoa, 66 App. Div. 330. $25,000, Genoa, Town of, N. Y. Actual loss. Town railroad aid bonds were void in hands of innocent purchaser. Affidavit of assessor that requisite con- sents had been given did not estop the town from defending against a holder of the bonds and proving that sufficient con- sents had not been given. Town not estopped by recitals in bonds. (1861) Starin v. Town of Genoa, 23 N. Y. 439. $50,000, Gorham, Town of, N. Y. Issue enjoined. Petition for railroad aid by town failed to state that the railroad was a corporation " in this state." (1872) In re Town of Gorham, 43 How. Pr. 263. $40,000, Greenwich, Town of, N. Y. Actual loss. Town railroad aid bonds payable in twenty years violated statute requiring payment in thirty years. Pur- chaser charged with knowledge of statute and violation upon 70 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID face of bond. (1882) Potter v. Town of Greenwich, aff d., 92 N. Y. 662. $30,000, Greenwood, Town of, N. Y. Petition for issuance of town railroad aid bonds failed to state the railroad was a corporation "in this state." Was cer- tiorari to review proceedings. (1873) People ex rel. Rogers v. Spencer, 55 N. Y. 1. $100,000, Hancock, Town of, N. Y. Actual loss. Town railroad aid bonds. Majority of tax- payers did not consent. Affidavit of assessor that a majority had consented was only prima facie evidence and did not estop the town from showing the illegality as against a bona fide holder. (1881) Cagwin v. Town of Hancock, 84 N. Y. 532. -, Haverstraw, Village of, N. Y. Statute required signature to petition for village railroad aid bonds to appear on the assessment roll "last completed." Held, if the assessment roll used as a basis for the decision had no oath written thereon or attached thereto and there was no proof that it had ever been verified, then it was not completed and the petition was void. Proceedings illegal. (1877) People ex rel. Gillies v. Suffern, 68 N. Y. 321. $100,000, Hempstead, Village of, N. Y. A resolution submitted for vote at village election contained a single proposition to issue bonds for waterworks and lighting system. Held, allowed voters no freedom of choice. Agreement to purchase bonds was not enforceable. (1901) Village of Hemp- stead v. Seymour, 34 Misc. 92. $50,000, Hume, Town of, N. Y. Actual loss. Petition to secure railroad aid by town failed to show that the amount named therein did not exceed 20% of the whole taxable property. Bonds were void in hands of rail- road company. (1879) Angel v. Town of Hume, 17 Hun, 374. , Jamaica, Village of, N. Y. Actual loss. One hundred and twenty persons were allowed to vote on proposition for issuing park bonds who were not as< MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID • 71 sessed for property on the last preceding assessment roll. Bonds issued in exchange for the land were void. Payment of interest enjoined by taxpayer. (1897) Scott v. Twombly, 20 Misc. 652. $75,000, Lansing, Town of, N. Y. Actual loss. Issue of railroad aid bonds by the town were void because of failure to comply with the statutory require- ments, requiring the directors to fix the termini of the road and to designate all the counties through which the road would pass. A recital that they were issued "under the provisions" of an act was no protection to bona fide holder. , Could not be ratified by town as no power existed to issue them. (1882) Thomas v. Town of Lansing, 14 Fed. 618; same issue, Mellen v. Same, 11 Fed. 820, 829. Also held void in Stewart v. Same, 104 U. S. 505. In Lytle v. Same, 147 U. S. 59, purchaser who knew bonds were being contested by town was not a bona fide purchaser. Same issue held void in Purdy v. Lansing, 128 U. S. 557. «100,000, Ledyard, Town of, N. Y. Petition for town railroad aid bonds failed to aver consent of a majority of taxpayers owning a majority of taxable property of town. Issue enjoined. (1871) People ex rel. Delafield v. Hughitt, 5 Lans. 89. $1,000, Mamakating, Town of, N. Y. Actual loss. By mistake one additional bond was issued at the time an issue of $175,000 town railroad aid bonds was made. Not authorized and was void, though held by innocent pur- chaser. (1885) Thompson v. Town of Mamakating, 37 Hun, 400. $30,000, Mentz, Town of, N. Y. Actual loss. Petition to issue town railroad aid bonds failed to show that the signers were taxpayers "not including those taxed for dogs or highway tax only." Bonds were void. (1890) Rich v. Town of Mentz, 134 U. S. 632. Same issue, Cook v. Same, 15 N. E. 541; 108 N. Y. 504. and Strang v. Cook, 47 Hun, 46. $30,000, Mt. Morris, Town of, N. Y. No statutory authority for town commissioners to agree with railroad to purchase ties which should remain the property of 72 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID the commissioners until the completion of the road and for this purpose to guarantee to issue town bonds. Such guarantee was void. (1880) Joslyn v. Dow, 19 Hun, 494. , Northampton, Town of, N. Y. Actual loss. Petition for issuance of town railroad aid bonds failed to show that the signers did not include persons taxed for dogs or highway taxes only, or that it was signed by a major- ity of those taxed for property not including such. Bonds not ratified by payment of interest for twenty years. (1903) Clark v. Town of Northampton, 120 Fed. 661. $200,000, Ogdensburgh, City of, N. Y. City had no power to issue railroad aid bonds to a road that did not have the right to operate within the county. Proceed- ings irregular. (1870) People ex rel. Averill v. Adirondack Co., 57 Barb. 656. $11,560.75, Oneida, City of, N. Y. Bonds issued to pay the individual and personal assessments of property owners assessed for sewer construction was not "for the benefit of the city" and was unauthorized by its charter. Agreement to purchase the bonds not enforceable. (1906) City of Oneida v. King, 116 App. Div. 35. $107,000, Ontario, Town of, N. Y. Actual loss. It did not appear from the assessor's affidavit that sufficient consents had been given and railroad aid bonds issued by town were therefore void. Holder was bona fide pur- chaser. (1878) Smith v. Ontario, Fed. Cas. 13,085. , Orleans, Town of, N. Y. Proceedings to issue town railroad aid bonds were illegal. Signer of petition could withdraw. (1873) People ex rel. Irwin v. Sawyer, 52 N. Y. 296. $125,000, Phelps, Town of, N. Y. Initials of signers to petition for town railroad aid were in- sufficient. Signatures could not be made by agents but should have been by taxpayers personally. Proceedings irregular. (1871) People ex rel. Haines v. Smith, 45 N. Y. 772. MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 73 $100,000, Rochester, Town of, K. Y. Consents to petition for railroad aid by town could be with- drawn. Petition was also defective in other ways. Proceedings were void. (1873) People ex rel. Town of Rochester v. Deyoe, 2 Thomp. & C. 142. , Romulus, Town of, N. Y. Given names, not initials, should have been signed to petition seeking railroad aid by town. Was certiorari to review proceed- ings. (1874) People ex rel. Sutton v. Franklin, 3 Thomp. & C. 794. $100,000, Saratoga, Town of, N. Y. Issue enjoined. Act authorizing city to donate the proceeds of bonds to a railroad corporation was unconstitutional. (1868) Sweet v. Hulbert, 51 Barb. 312. $100,000, Saratoga Springs, Town of, N. Y. Proceedings to issue town railroad aid bonds were invalid. Signer of petition who acted in a representative capacity failed to show his right to represent; also several corporation signers failed to show authority of those signing, and that the corpora- tion was solvent. (1871) People ex rel. Freeman v. Hulburt, 46 N. Y. 110. , Shawangunk, Town of, N. Y. Actual loss. Railroad aid bonds of town were issued fraudu- lently by the commissioners without the consent of electors and were void. Also a special act attempting to validate the bonds so issued was unconstitutional because the legislature could not in the first instance compel the issuance of the bonds without the consent of voters. (1878) Hardenbergh v. Van Keuren, 16 Hun, 17. $125,000, Sodus Point, Town of, N. Y. Petitioners for town railroad aid should have signed Christian names, — initials not sufficient. Issue enjoined. (1870) People ex rel. Haines v. Smith, 45 N. Y. 772. $55,000, Southfield, Town of, Richmond County, N. Y. While these drainage bonds have never been held void, yet 74 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID they were a total loss to their holders and interest has not been paid. People ex rel. Moller v. Marsh, 21 A. D. 88 (1897), held that a petition for a writ of mandamus to compel the levy and collection of a tax to pay interest was defective because it al- leged that the drainage commissioners were appointed pursuant •to an order of the "County Court" when it should have stated "County Judge." A subsequent writ for same purpose was denied in People ex rel. Nelson v. Marsh, 82 A. D. 571 (1903), affd., 178 N. Y. 618, because of laches and because the action was barred by the statute of limitations. -, Springport, Town of, N. Y. Actual loss. Railroad aid bonds issued by town were void be- cause not under seal. (1877) Avery v. Springport, Fed. Cas. 676. $100,000, Springport, Town of, N. Y. Actual loss. Town railroad aid bonds were void for failure to obtain consents of majority of taxpayers. (1878) Town of Springport v. Teutonia Savings Bank, 75 N. Y. 397. Same issue, People ex rel. Yawger v. Allen, 52 N. Y. 538; also same issue, Town of Springport v. German Uptown Savings Bank; Same v. Franklin Savings Bank, 84 N. Y. 403, holding that consents of taxpayers could be withdrawn (1881). $25,000, Sterling, Town of, N. Y. Actual loss. Town not estopped from showing failure to se- cure sufficient consents by affidavit of assessor that a majority of taxpayers had consented to issuance of railroad aid bonds. Were void in hands of bona fide holder. Town was not estopped by recitals in bonds that sufficient consents had been obtained. (1861) Gould v. Town of Sterling, 23 N. Y. 439. $34,000, Stockton, Town of, N. Y. Railroad was a private enterprise and town could not be com- pelled to take stock against its consent or that of its taxable in- habitants. Mandamus against town officials would not lie to compel issuance of bonds authorized by statute. (1873) People ex rel. D. W. & P. R. Co. v. Batchellor, 53 N. Y. 128. $2,000, Suspension Bridge, Village of, N. Y. Actual loss. Village waterworks bonds were lithographed, MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 75 signed and sealed and before delivery were stolen and put upon the market. Held, had no valid inception and were void. Bona fide purchaser not protected. (1892) Germania Savings Bank v. Village of Suspension Bridge, 73 Hun, 590. $148,000, Thompson, Town of, N. Y. Actual loss. Town railroad aid bonds. Failed to get consent of taxpayers. Not ratified by legislative act. Bona fide pur- chaser lost. (1878) Horton v. Town of Thompson, 71 N. Y. 513. $231,000, Troy, Citywf, N. Y. Issue of park and waterworks bonds by city enjoined by tax- payers' action, because the legislative act purporting to amend the city charter, and under which the bonds were to be issued, violated the constitution providing that a local act should not embrace more than one subject which should be expressed in its title. (1905) Cahill v. Hogan, 73 N. E. 39. $25,000, Venice, Town of, N. Y. Actual loss. Railroad aid bonds issued by town without req- uisite number of written consents of taxpayers were void. (1873) Town of Venice v. Breed, 1 Thomp. & C. 130. , Wellsborough, Town of, N. Y. Petition for issuance of town railroad aid bonds failed to state that a majority of taxpayers consented " excluding those taxed for dogs or highway taxes only." Proceedings were invalid. (1879) Town of Wellsborough, v. New York & C. R. Co., 76 N. Y. 182. $4,000, Woodbury, Town of, N. Y. Actual loss. Town bonds issued under the subscription act (Laws of 1892, chap. 664) were void because act was unconstitu- tional, being in conflict with the state constitution. (1903) Newburgh Savings Bank v. Town of Woodbury, 65 N. E. 858. NORTH CAROLINA $98,000, Buncombe County, N. C. Actual loss. County refunding bonds declared void because original railroad aid bonds were void and were not validated by an act passed for that purpose, which was not passed in the manner required by the constitution. Interest had been paid 76 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID on the bonds. (1898) Commissioners of Buncombe County v. Payne, 31 S. E. 711. $10,000, Carthage Township, N. C. Actual loss. Taxpayer could enjoin tax levy to pay interest on township bonds issued under unconstitutional statute. Stat- ute was unconstitutional because yeas and nays were not re- corded on legislative journal on second and third readings. Bona fide purchaser not protected. (1904) Graves v. Moore County, 47 S. E. 134. $15,000, Durham, Town of, N. C. Actual loss. Taxpayer could restrain the collection of a tax to pay interest on town school bonds issued under a statute au- thorizing such bonds upon the approving vote of a majority of those who voted because said statute violated the state constitu- tion, requiring the approval of a majority of the qualified voters of the town. (1887) Duke v. Brown, 96 N. C. 127. $110,000, Goldsboro, City of, N. C. Proposition to issue city waterworks bonds should have been submitted to voters. Issue enjoined. (1904) Robinson v. City of Goldsboro, 47 S. E. 462. $18,000, Hendersonville, Town of, N. C. Under town charter, proposition to issue sidewalk bonds should have been submitted to voters. The defendants who were brokers could not be compelled to take the issue. (1908) Commissioners of the Town of Hendersonville v. Webb & Co., 61 S. E. 670. $2,000, Jackson County, W. C. Actual loss. Railroad aid bonds held void. Township bonds showed on their face that they were issued under act of general assembly and that an examination of the assembly's journals would have shown that those acts were not passed in the manner expressly required by constitution, art. 2, sec. 14, and charged a purchaser of the bonds with notice of their invalidity. Bona fide purchaser charged with knowledge of their invalidity. (1908) Wittowsky v. Board of Commissioners of Jackson County, 63 S. E. 275. MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 77 $25,000, Murfreesboro Township, N. C. Actual loss. Bona fide purchaser must take notice that the statute relied upon as authority for issue of township railroad aid bonds was not legally passed by the general assembly, as shown by the assembly journal. On passage of act the nays were not recorded. Interest had been paid on bonds. No estoppel by reason of recitals in bonds of compliance with constitution and laws of state. (1902) Debnam v. Chitty, 43 S. E. 3. $50,000, New Hanover County, N. C. Road improvement bonds of county, although authorized by voters, were not valid because the special act relied upon was not properly passed by the legislature, — it not appearing in the transcript of the legislative journal that the names of the "noes" were recorded on final reading. Agreement to purchase the bonds not enforceable. (1901) Commissioners of New Hanover County v. De Rosset, 40 S. E. 43. $40,000, Oxford, Town of, N. C. Actual loss. No statutory authority for issue of town railroad aid bonds because act was not passed as required by the consti- tution making it mandatory that the yeas and nays on the sec- ond and third reading should be entered in the journal. Pur- chaser was bound to take notice even though the statute was published by authority of law and interest had been paid on the bonds. (1896) Union Bank v. Commissioners of the Town of Oxford, 25 S. E. 966. Same issue, Board of Commissioners v. Union Bank, 96 Fed. 293. $5,000, Rockingham County, N. C. Actual loss. County commissioners after canvass of vote failed to declare that a majority had voted in favor of issuing railroad aid bonds. Bonds failed to recite that a majority had voted in favor of subscription. Bona fide purchaser took with notice of defects which rendered the bonds void. (1894) Clay- brook v. Commissioners of Rockingham County, 114 N. C. 453. $100,000, Stanley County, N. C. Actual loss. Legislative journal could be introduced in evi- dence to show yeas and nays were not entered on second and third reading of act to contradict the printed statute. Railroad 78 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID aid bonds were issued without legislative authority and were void. Payment of coupons enjoined. (1897) Commissioners of Stanley County v. Snuggs, 28 S. E. 539; 121 N. C. 394. Same is- sue held valid in Stanley County v. Coler, 190 U. S. 437. $75,000, Valleytown Township, N. C. Statutory authority to issue $25,000 road bonds did not au- thorize issue of $75,000. Submitted on agreed facts. Action was by town to compel brokers to accept the bonds upon is suance. (1910) Highway Commissioners of Valleytown Township v. Webb & Co., 68 S. E. 211. $20,000, Washington, Town of, N. C. Issue of town bonds enjoined because proposition for electric light plant should have been submitted to voters. (1898) Mayo v. Town of Washington, 29 S. E. 343. $8,000, Williamston, Town of, N. C. Town commissioners had no power to issue bonds to furnish electric lighting without submitting proposition to voters. Is- sue enjoined. (1910) Ellison v. Town of Williamston, 67 S. E. 255. $10,000, Wilmington, City of, N. C. Actual loss. City bonds issued in aid of rebellion were void because against public policy. (1873) Weith and Arents v. City of Wilmington, 68 N. C. 24. NORTH DAKOTA , Barnes County, School District No. 70, N. D. Provision for payment of exchange in addition to interest rendered school district bonds nonnegotiable and district could show they were issued without consideration. Case arose on pleadings and did not actually determine legality of bonds. (1895) Flagg v. School District No. 70 Barnes County, 65 N. W. 674. -, Barnes County, School District No. 52 of, N. D. Actual loss. Statute authorizing municipal corporations to issue bonds payable in not less than ten years from date was violated by school bonds issued payable in eleven days less than MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 79 ten years, which were therefore void. Bona fide purchaser charged with knowledge of all requirements of statute under which issued. (1893) People's Bank of St. Paul v. School District No. 52, 57 Nr W. 787. 85,700, Barnes County, School District No. SO of, N. D. Actual loss. Refunding school bonds purchased by state were void because: 1st, proposition was not submitted to voters; 2d, district was not qualified to adopt such proposition as at least twenty-five legal votes had not been cast at last preceding annual election; 3d, clerk who signed bonds did not reside within the district. Recitals did not estop district. Bona fide pur- chaser not protected. (1909) State v. School District No. 60 of Barnes County, 120 N. W. 555. , Cass County, N. D. Drainage law was unconstitutional. Issue of county drainage bonds enjoined. Many projects were constructed under this law before it was declared unconstitutional. (1894) Martin v. Tyler, 60 N. W. 392; 4 N. D. 278. $100,000, Fargo, City of, N. D. Notice of election did not state amount of city bonds to be voted upon, nor did the resolution of the city council state the purpose of the issue. Question voted upon contained two prop- ositions. Issue enjoined. (1909) Stern v. City of Fargo, 122 N. W. 403. $45,000, Grand Forks, City of, W. D. Issue enjoined. Refunding bonds would temporarily exceed debt limit. Were considered as a new issue. (1897) Birkholz v. Dinnie, 6 N. D. 511; 72 N. W. 931. $20,000, Kidder County, N. D. Issue enjoined. Notice of meeting of county board failed to state object. Question of erecting courthouse and jail not properly submitted to electors. (1885) Territory ex rel. Higgins v. Steele, 23 N. W. 91. $75,000, Pierce County, N. D. Issue restrained because notice of election failed to state the 80 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID denomination of the bonds proposed to be issued and rate of in- terest; also as bonds were to be used for erection of a courthouse and a jail, as two separate buildings, two different propositions were submitted and should have been voted on independently. (1909) Hughes v. Horsky, 122 N. W. 799. OHIO , Alessandro Irrigation District, Ohio. Sale by holder of irrigation district bonds concededly void, enjoined by the district, as they might reach hands of an inno- cent purchaser. (1898) Alessandro Irrigation District v. Sav- ings & Trust Co., 88 Fed. 928. $17,000, Brown Township, Ohio. Actual loss. Township had statutory power to issue railroad aid bonds only when county did not. Bona fide purchaser could not compel levy of tax to pay interest. (1862) Hopple v. Brown Tovmship, 13 Oh. St. 311. $2,500, Bryan, Village of, Ohio. Actual loss. Village refunding bonds could not be issued to include the premium paid by purchasers of the original bonds. Such refunding bonds were antedated and accepted while an in- junction against their issue was pending. Held, holder was not an innocent purchaser, and bonds were void. (1898) Altaffer v. Nelson, 18 Oh. Cir. Ct. 145. $15,610,000, Cincinnati, City of, Ohio. Taxpayers' action to enjoin issue of refunding bonds. Relief granted because contract for sale of bonds was void because it failed to provide for advertisement and competitive bidding, and because it provided for adding interest to principal and re- funding both. (1899) City of Cincinnati v. Guckenberger, 54 N. E. 376. Same issue, Roberts v. Taft, 116 Fed. 228 (1901). $250,000, Elyria, City of, Ohio. Issue enjoined. Resolution was not read by council on three different days. The purchase of waterworks and the erection of new ones were distinct measures requiring different proceedings. Council and not mayor had power to determine when, in what State Alabama Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Florida Georgia Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Jersey New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oregon Pennsylvania South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Total County $250,000 400,000 40,000 275,000 75,000 595,000 100,000 25,000 185,000 125,000 70,000 10,000 141,000 30,000 50,000 95,000 55,500 45,000 200,000 410,000 89,000 50,000 630,000 $3,945,500 39 City 43 $4,886,500 11,400,000 20,000 885,000 87,000 75,346,343 60,000 125,000 400,000 1,506,000 10,000 20,000,000 450,000 2,421,000 100,000 162,000 280,000 396,800 49,000 431,000 128,000 145,000 16,010,000 33,349,000 430,000 35,000 130,000 22,500 40,500 350,000 $169,655,643 73 3 85 Town, Parish $28,000 30,000 190,000 3,500 27,614 25,000 50,000 20,000 45,000 6,500 974,000 103,000 125,000 9,000 235,000 22,000 6,000 $1,899,614 38 2 1 1 48 Village, Borough $15,800 40,000 1,500 2,000 220,000 17,000 $296,800 8 TABLE III.— ISSUES ENJOINED See explanation of table on page School District 11,000 3,500 50,000 215,000 20,000 12,000 12 #11,500 Railroad Aid $28,000 25,000 20,000 125,000 70,000 117,000 1,244,000 200,000 100,000 50,000 50,000 175,000 100,000 School Purposes 510,000 7 110,000 2 475,000 21,614 100,000 $3,520,614 14 43 19 $10,000 54 11,000 1,500 3,500 50,000 215,000 20,000 15,500 12,000 9,000 $347,500 11 * Irrigation district, amount not stated. TABLE III.— ISSUES ENJOINED, ETC. See explanation of table on page 8 Railroad Aid $28,000 510,000 110,000 475,000 21,614 100,000 25,000 20,000 125,000 70,000 117,000 1,244,000 200,000 100,000 50,000 50,000 175,000 100,000 $3,520,614 School Purposes $10,000 11,000 14 43 19 54 1,500 3,500 50,000 215,000 20,000 15,500 12,000 9,000 $347,500 11 Waterworks, Gas and Electric Lighting Plants $289,500 20,000 885,000 32,000 240,000 3,500 400,000 20 165,800 2,421,000 37,000 150,000 75,000 331,000 138,000 380,000 455,000 35,000 22,500 40,000 22,000 250,000 1 8 8 1 1 $6,392,300 41 Streets, Bridges, Roads, Parks, Buildings, and Public Improvements $4,847,000 3 11,400,000 2 60,000 2 61,343 2 25,000 1 245,000 3 1,031,000 3 50,000 1 10,000 1 385,000 4 8,000 1 12,000 1 290,000 2 200,000 1 40,000 1 331,000 2 143,000 3 95,000 2 17,000 1 360,000 2 219,000 4 60,500 2 6,000 1 819,895,8-43 45 52 Private Enterprise $100,000 40,000 500,000 $640,000 Refunding $123,800 45,000 15,665,500 6,000,000 $21,834,300 General Indebtedness $400,000 $100,000 27,349,000 130,000 $27,979,000 $75,000,000 Miscellaneous 20,000,000 $95,000,000 * Irrigation district, amount not stated. MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 81 series and amounts bonds were to be sold. (1898) Elyria Gas & Water Co. v. City of Elyria, 49 N. E. 335. $150,000, Hamilton, City of, Ohio. Issue of proposed gasworks bonds was enjoined and election held void, 1st, because the notice of election was void as it was given before the ordinance authorizing it took effect; 2d, be- cause a statute provided that such ordinances should take effect after thirty days, hence ten days were insufficient; 3d, because the form of ballot compelled the voters to vote for both the pur- chase and construction or against both instead of for either the purchase or construction or against. (1888) Hensly v. City of Hamilton, 3 Oh. Cir. Ct. 201. $100,000, Hancock County, Ohio. Actual loss. County railroad aid bonds were void in hands of innocent purchaser because the road had never been located through or in the county as required by statute. Act validating bonds regular on their face did not apply. (1860) State ex rel. Treadwell v. Commissioners of Hancock County, 11 Oh. St. 183. $14,091.58, Highland County, Ohio. Tax for payment of bonds issued to construct turnpike en- joined. Bona fide purchaser bound to take notice of the limita- tion upon the power of taxation, the extent of the tax district and valuation of the property thereof. (1901) Miller v. Hixon, 59 N. E. 749. $100,000, Marshall County, Ohio. Actual loss. Railroad aid bonds issued by county declared void in hands of bona fide holder because the election for sub- mitting question to voters was called by the county court instead of by the board of supervisors. (1864) Marshall County v. Cook, 38 111. 44. , Mineral Ridge, Village of, Ohio. Actual loss. Village refunding bonds were void because original bonds in aid of railroad were not authorized by a valid or sufficient ordinance. (1900) United States Trust Co. v. Vil- lage of Mineral Ridge, 104 Fed. 851. 82 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID $55,500, Muskingum, County of, Ohio. Issue of county refunding bonds enjoined because not ad- vertised and because part were to be issued for notes, which could not be refunded. (1908) Muskingum County Commis- sioners v. State, 85 N. E. 562. $8,000, Porter Township, Ohio. Actual loss. Statute required that proposition for issue of rail- road aid bonds should first be submitted to voters of county before submission to voters of township. Bonds issued by town- ship before refusal of county to subscribe were void as against a bona fide holder. Township not estopped by recitals from show- ing that it was without legislative authority to issue the bonds. (1884) Northern Bank of Toledo v. Porter Township, 110 U. S. 608. SI 7,000, Rockford, Village of, Ohio. "?"■ Issue of village street and sewer improvement bonds enjoined because they would exceed debt limit; also bonds could not be dated back so as to obtain effect of a curative statute. (1906) Smith v. Rockford Village, 29 Oh. Cir. Ct. 478. $20,000, Westwood School District, Village of, Ohio. Actual loss. Bonds were fraudulently negotiated by treas- urer after they had been delivered to him for cancellation. (1885) Board of Education v. Sinton, 41 Oh. St. 504. $76,000, Wooster, City of, Ohio. Actual loss. Refunding bonds of city failed to express on their face the purpose of the issue and the ordinance authorizing them, as required by statute. As the original bonds (railroad aid) were void having been issued under an unconstitutional act, the refunding bonds were invalid. (1897) Keehn v. City of Wooster, 7 Oh. Cir. Dec. 456. OREGON $45,000, Union County, Oregon. Issue of county bonds to pay expenses of relocating county seat would exceed debt limit. Issue enjoined. (1903) Eaton v. Mimnaugh, 73 Pac. 754. MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 83 PENNSYLVANIA $200,000, Crawford County, Pa. Agreement by county to issue railroad aid bonds was void be- cause the railroad had fraudulently represented that it had ob- tained private subscriptions to a certain amount when in fact those subscribers had been released and discharged from all lia- bility; $30,000 county bonds issued and delivered under the agreement were void. (1858) County of Crawford v. Pittsburgh & Erie R. R. Co., 32 Pa. St. 141. , Green County, Pa. Actual loss. School board had no authority to issue bonds for purpose of repaying citizens who had obtained volunteers to army. Were void. (1865) Meek v. Bayard, 53 Pa. St. 217. $14,000, Lancaster, City of, Pa. Failed to submit proposition to vote of people. Issue of city bonds enjoined. (1899) Houston v. City of Lancaster, 191 Pa. St. 143; 43 Atl. 83. $250,000, Lawrence County, Pa. Actual loss. County desired to assist railroad and in order to allow the railroad contractor to sell the bonds for less than par, his estimate was increased 24% and county bonds issued at par for the increased sum. Held, was a fraud on the county and bonds were void. (1870) Lawrence County Appeal, 67 Pa. St. 87. Same issue, Diamond v. Lawrence County, 37 Pa. St. 353. Pendency of an action was notice to all the world. Purchaser took with notice (1860). $150,000, Mercer County, Pa. Actual loss. County railroad aid bonds were void. Statute requiring grand jury to fix amount of subscription by county conferred no authority on county commissioners to make any subscription, when the grand jury only recommended the sub- scription should not exceed a certain amount. (1891) Frick v. Mercer County, 138 Pa. St. 523; 21 Atl. 6. $9,000, Millerstown, Borough, Pa. Actual loss. Borough bonds issued to pay existing debts ex- ceeded debt limit and were void in hands of bona fide holder 84 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID because of failure to secure assent of electors. (1886) Borough of Millerstown v. Frederick, 114 Pa. St. 435. $8,000,000, Philadelphia, City of, Pa. Issue enjoined. Notice of election for issue of city bonds for general purposes failed to contain statement of indebtedness as required by statute. (1910) Bullitt v. City of Philadelphia, Vol. 19, No. 51, Legal Int. $11,000,000, Philadelphia, City of, Pa. Issue of city bonds enjoined by taxpayer because proposition was not submitted to voters as required by constitution. (1897) Pepper v. City of Philadelphia, 181 Pa. St. 566; 37 Atl. 579. $6,775,000, Pittsburgh, City of, Pa. The statute required that the corporate authorities by their ordinance or vote should "signify a desire" to increase the in- debtedness. The ordinance failed to "signify a desire," hence was void, and the election held thereunder was illegal, and the bond issue was enjoined. (1910) Hoffman v. City of Pittsburgh, 229 Pa. St. 36; 78 Atl. 26. , Pittsburgh, City of, Pa. Actual loss. Railroad aid bonds of' Pittsburgh were void be- cause of lack of legislative authority. Holder of coupons of bonds transferable only on books of the city could not recover on the coupons without showing a legal assignment of the bonds to him. (1859) Oelrich v. Pittsburgh, Fed. Cas. 10,442. $6,000,000, Pittsburgh, City of, Pa. Issue of city refunding bonds enjoined because the contract made by the city with the syndicate for the sale of the bonds was void, as a commission was allowed to such purchasers. (1885) Whelen's Appeal, 108 Pa. St. 163; 1 Atl. 88. $1,500,000, Pittsburgh, City of, Pa. Issue of city bonds for general purposes enjoined because the valuation of property fixed by the city authorities and not the valuation made by county authorities was the proper figure, and because the authorities failed to provide for levying a tax to pro- MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 85 vide payment of the bonds. (1895) Bruce v. City of Pittsburgh, 116 Pa. St. 152; 30 Atl. 831. $500, Rainsburgh Borough, Pa. Borough bonds issued to pay existing indebtedness were void because officers failed to file a statement of indebtedness as re- quired by law and because no provision was made for payment. Holder could recover, however, for money loaned. (1889) Rainsburgh Borough v. Fyan, 127 Pa. St. 74; 17 Atl. 678. SOUTH CAROLINA , Abbeville*County, Ninety-six Township, S. C. Actual loss. Township railroad aid bonds were not for a "corporate purpose," and therefore act authorizing same was unconstitutional. Bonds were void and tax paid could be re- covered. (1888) Floyd v. Perrin, 8 S. E. 14; 30 S. C. 1. $100,000, Anderson, City of, S. C. Statute authorizing issue of railroad aid bonds did not repeal that part of a former statute requiring vote of people. Issuance by city could not be compelled. (1892) State ex rel. Vandiver v. Tolly, 16 S. E. 195. $15,100, Broad River Township, S. C. Actual loss. Constitution authorized towns to raise money for "corporate purposes." A statute authorizing town to issue railroad aid bonds was repugnant to this section and unconstitu- tional and town railroad aid bonds issued pursuant thereto were void. Legislature had no power to validate them. (1897) Cole- man v. Broad River Township, 27 S. E. 774. $2,000,000, Charleston, City of, S. C. Actual loss. "Fire Loan Bonds" were void. City loaned its bonds to persons desiring to rebuild in the burned district. Were for private not municipal purposes. (1884) Feldman & Co. v. City Council of Charleston, 23 S. C. 57. $25,000, Cherokee Township, S. C. Town railroad aid bonds issued under unconstitutional act were void. (1888) Whitesides v. Neely, 8 S. E. 27. Partial re- 86 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID covery allowed by bona fide holders. Grannis v. Cherokee Town- ship, 47 Fed. 427. $80,000, Florence, City of, S. C. Proposition to issue city bonds for construction of waterworks and sewerage system should have been voted on separately. Issue enjoined. (1909) Chase v. Gilbert, 65 S. E. 735. $125,000, Gaffney, Town of, S. C. Statute required that the amount of bonds for electric light- ing, waterworks and sewerage system should be voted upon separately. Issuance could not be compelled. (1909) Ross v. Lipscomb, 65 S. W. 451. $12,000, McColl School District, S. C. School trustees failed to have a survey and plot of district made prior to election, as required by statute. Issue of school bonds enjoined. (1910) McLaurin v. Tatum, 67 S. E. 560. $250,000, Rock Hill, City of, S. C. Proposition for issuing city bonds to construct waterworks or sewerage or lighting plant should have been voted upon sep- arately and not altogether. Issuance could not be compelled by mandamus. (1909) Johnson v. Roddey, 65 S. E. 626. SOUTH DAKOTA $35,000, Aberdeen, City of, S. D. Issue of city bonds to construct electric lighting plant re- strained. The statute requiring concurrence of a majority of electors of the city is not complied with by a majority of those voting on the proposition. (1906) Williamson v. Aldrich, 108 N. W. 1063. $30,500, Bon Homme County, S. D. Actual loss. Chairman and clerk of county commissioners issued county bonds to pay outstanding warrants without au- thority of board. Bona fide purchaser required to ascertain that officers acted within authority. Recitals of bonds not conclusive against county. (1890) Brown v. Bon Homme County, 46 N. W. 173. MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 87 $1,400, Brookings County, School District No. 7 of, S. D. Actual loss. School bond in sum of $1,400 violated statute requiring bonds to be in denomination of not more than $500 nor less than $50. Void in hands of innocent purchaser. (1896; Livingston v. School District No. 7 of Brookings County, 59 N. W. 15; 9 S. D. 345. Recovery allowed on quantum meruit, Same v. Same, 76 N. W. 301. $10,000, Huron, City of, S. D. , Actual loss. City bonds recited they were issued to pay float- ing indebtedness, but in fact were issued to boom a political scheme. Held, illegal because purpose was unconstitutional. (1897) John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company v. City of Huron, 80 Fed. 652. $11,000, St. Lawrence Township, S. D. Actual loss. Township bonds were void in hands of innocent purchaser because their issue exceeded the debt limit. A recital on their face that they did not exceed debt limit did not estop the town from showing invalidity. (1909) St. Lawrence Township v. Furman, 171 Fed. 400. TENNESSEE $22,000, Athens, Town of, Term. Actual loss. A town originally incorporated under a certain act lost such organization by the repeal of the act and a subse- quent attempt to organize it as a municipal corporation failed because the certificate of the sheriff holding the election was not indorsed on the application for charter and registered with it as required by statute, hence having no legal existence, railroad aid bonds issued by it were void in hands of bona fide holder. (1891) Ruohs v. Town of Athens, 18 S. W. 400. $50,000, Brownsville, City of, Tenn. Actual loss. No constitutional authority for city to hold elec- tion and issue railroad aid bonds and the holders could not re- cover. {1889) Norton v. Brownsville, 129 U. S. 479. $50,000, Campbell County, Tenn. No statutory authority for county to hold election and issue railroad aid bonds. Issuance thereof could not be compelled. 88 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID (1869) Justices of Campbell County v. Knoxville and Kentucky Railroad Co., 46 Tenn. 598. $5,000, Claiborne County, Tenn. Actual loss. County having power to erect a courthouse and jail had no implied authority to issue a bond as security for a debt contracted for such purpose. Bond was void. (1884) Claiborne County v. Brooks, 111 U. S. 400. $50,000, Dyersburg, Town of, Term. Actual loss. Power of town to subscribe for stock of railroad did not carry with it implied authority to issue negotiable bonds therefor. Bonds held by bona fide purchaser were void. (1888) Norton v. Dyersburg, 127 U. S. 160. $150,000, Hamilton, County of, Tenn. Issue enjoined. Special act providing for issue ©f county bonds for foot, wagon and railroad bridge was unconstitutional because being for private purpose. (1894) Colburn v. Chatta- nooga W. R. Co., 28 S. W. 298. , Hawkins, County of, Tenn. Actual loss. Bonds signed by chairman and clerk of court without a court order or county subscription to the stock of the turnpike company were void. County was not estopped by having received the coupons for taxes. (1876) Barnard v. Haw- kins County, 2 Tenn. Cas. 97. $75,000, Johnson City, Tenn. Actual loss. City was authorized to issue bonds to aid domes- tic railroad corporation but issued its bonds to aid a foreign rail- road corporation, although the bonds recited on their face that it was a domestic corporation. Bonds were void even in hands of innocent purchasers. (1897) City of Johnson City v. Charles- ton, C. & C. R. Co., 44 S. W. 670. Same issue void (1900) Travellers' Insurance Co. v. Mayor, etc., of Johnson City, 99 Fed. 663. $210,000, Knox County, Tenn. County court had no statutory power to make county bridge bonds or interest payable in United States gold coin of the pres- MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 89 ent standard weight and fineness. Issuance of such bonds not allowed. (1896) Burnett v. Maloney, 37 S. W. 689. $50,000, Lawrence County, Tenn. Actual loss. An act of 1851 authorized certain counties to subscribe to railroad stock upon the affirmative vote of a major- ity of voters. The constitution of 1870 prohibited any county from becoming a stockholder except after an election and the assent of three-fourths of the voters participating. All laws not inconsistent with the constitution were continued in effect. Held, the constitution was a limitation on the powers of coun- ties and not a grant of power. Hence county under the circum- stances had no power to issue railroad aid bonds and such were void. Holder was bona fide purchaser. Decision by Judges Taft and Lurton. (1899) Fidelity Trust & Safety-Vault Co. v. Lawrence County, 92 Fed. 576. $135,000, Memphis, City of, Tenn. Actual loss. Part of issue of $1,135,000. Voters authorized issue of $1,000,000 to pay general indebtedness hence the ex- cess was unauthorized and void. Payment of interest did not impart validity. (1875) City of Memphis v. Bethel, 17 S. W. 191. $17,000, Milan, Town of, Tenn. Actual loss. Power of town to issue railroad aid bonds in amounts of $1,000 each at 6% was violated by issues of $150 at 8% each. Bonds were void. Power "to lay and collect taxes to pay interest on the bonds which may be issued " did not confer authority to issue bonds. (1883) Taxpayers of Milan v. Tenn. Central R. Co., 79 Tenn. 329. $12,000, Milan, Town of, Tenn. Actual loss. Statutory power of town to subscribe for stock of railroad did not confer power to issue negotiable bonds therefor. Were void. (1888) Kelly v. Milan, 127 U. S. 139. Different issue than Taxpayers of Milan v. Tenn. C. R., 79 Tenn. 329. $300,000, Shelby County, Tenn. Actual loss. Railroad aid bonds issued by the board of com- missioners of the county were void because the act creating the 90 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID board was unconstitutional, nor could the bonds be considered valid because issued by de facto officers inasmuch as the office itself did not exist de jure; nor could the bonds be subsequently ratified by the county without the assent of three-fourths of the voters. (1886) Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U. S. 425. TEXAS $71,500, Austin, City of, Texas. Actual loss. City bonds issued for general purposes were void because no provision was made for levying a tax to pay interest and to provide sinking fund. (1897) Nalle v. City of Austin, 42 S. W. 780. , Baird Independent School District, Texas. Issue of school bonds enjoined because tax levy exceeded twenty cents on $100. (1908) Snyder v. Baird Independent School District, 113 S. W. 521. Same case, 111 S. W. 723, holding that this school district was not a municipal corporation within the meaning of the statute, and that a special act was unconsti- tutional (1908). $16,000, Brazoria County, Texas. Issue of county bridge bonds enjoined because of failure to provide tax levy to pay interest and provide a sinking fund. (1897) Brazoria County v. Youngstown Bridge Co., 80 Fed. 10. $15,000, Brenham, City of, Texas. Actual loss. Statutory power for city to borrow money for general purposes conferred no rights to issue negotiable bonds, and therefore even a bona fide holder of them could not recover against the city. (1892) Brenham v. German-American Bank, 144 U. S. 173 and 549. $51,000, Cleburne, City of, Tex. Actual loss. City waterworks bonds dated January 1st, were signed July 3d, under a resolution of the city council, by a pri- vate citizen who had been mayor on January 1st, but who had gone out of office a few days prior to date of his signature. The bonds were not therefore issued as required by statute and were void even when bought by bona fide holder. (1889) Coler v. Cleburne, 131 U. S. 162. MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 91 $25,000, Columbus, City of, Texas. Partial loss. City waterworks bonds were void in part be- cause they exceeded debt limit. (1902) City of Columbus v. Woonsocket Institution for Savings, 114 Fed. 162. 520,000, Denison, City of, Texas. Actual loss. City bonds, issued to redeem outstanding city scrip and improve streets failed to state the purpose on their face,, as required by law, other than to state that they were is- sued by virtue of a certain ordinance without giving its title or purpose and were void in hands of bona fide purchaser. (1892) Barnett v. Denison, 145 U. S. 135. -, Ector County, Texas. Issue of county jail bonds enjoined because persons voted who were not taxpayers within the meaning of the statute. (1900) Hendrick v. Culberson, 56 S. W. 616. , Galveston, City of, Texas. City had no authority to agree to issue bonds for sidewalk im- provements. This decision was collateral to the main issues in the case. (1877) Hitchcock v. Galveston, 96 U. S. 341. $13,000, Hemphill County, Texas. Contract by a county judge for building a jail and to issue county bonds was void as the county commissioners' court alone had such authority. (1889) Polly v. Hopkins, 11 S. W. 1084. $3,000, Hempstead, City of, Texas. Actual loss. Mayor and secretary of city issued the bonds without an ordinance, although the bonds recited that they were issued in compliance with such an ordinance. Bonds were void in hands of innocent purchaser. He must take notice of their illegality, and the fact that the rate of taxation would be in- creased beyond the limit authorized by the constitution. (1901) Peck v. City of Hempstead, 65 S. W. 653. $39,000, Howard County, Texas. Actual loss. County courthouse bonds exceeded debt limit and were void. Innocent purchaser charged with notice. (1892) Francis v. Howard County, 54 Fed. 487. 92 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID $5,000, Mitchell County, Texas. Actual loss. County commissioners issued bridge bonds but the court minutes provided for bonds to be issued for court- house purposes. Innocent purchaser lost because chargeable with notice of the court's order. These bonds were ten out of a series of sixty, all reciting that they were issued for bridge pur- poses. (1898) Mitchell County v. City National Bank, 91 Tex. 361; 43 S. W. 880. $33,250, Mitchell County, Texas. Partial loss. Order of commissioners' court, by authority of which the county bonds were issued, provided for using the funds for a jail and a courthouse. There was no statutory au- thority for advertising the bonds for jail purposes. Purchaser must take notice of the order, although the bonds purported on their face to be issued for courthouse purposes alone. The bonds were held proportionately void as to $11,925 of the total, said amount being used for erection of the jail. (1899) Noel Young Bond and Stock Company v. Mitchell County, 54 S. W. 284. 830,000, Nolan County, Texas. Actual loss. County courthouse bonds were void even in hands of bona fide purchaser because of failure to provide at time of their issue for levying a sufficient tax to create a sinking fund in addition to meeting the interest, as required by consti- tution. Legislature had no power to validate the bonds as they violated constitutional provisions. (1894) Quaker City National Bank v. Nolan County, 66 Fed. 883. Same issue, Nolan County v. State, 17 S. W. 823 (1891). 84,500, Paris, City of, Texas. Actual loss. City ordinance authorizing bonds to be issued in payment of fire engine provided for their payment by a special tax of one-tenth of one per cent of value of taxable property. As city had levied tax to its full authority, the provision for the special tax was unconstitutional. As the bonds recited they were payable out of the special tax, they were not a general liability of the city and action on coupons could not be sustained. Ac- tion barred by statute of limitations anyway. (1887) Gould v. City of Paris, 68 Tex. 511. MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 93 $27,000, Terrell, City of, Texas. Actual loss. Bonds issued to erect city hall exceeded debt limit and were void in hands of holder for value. Provision for payment of interest and sinking fund out of general revenue was void because power to contract debts was exhausted. (1894) MiUsaps v. City of Terrell, 60 Fed. 193. $28,000, Terrell, City of, Texas. Partial loss. Part of city waterworks bonds exceeded debt limit and were void in hands of bona fide holder. City not es- topped by recitals in the bonds. (1890) Citizens' Bank v. City of Terrell, 14 S. W. 1003. $130,000, Waco, City of, Texas. The mayor had no authority to sell city public improvement bonds at his discretion as to price. Such contract for private sale could not be enforced. (1896) Blair & Co. v. City of Waco, 75 Fed. 800. $60,000, Washington County, Texas. Issue enjoined. No implied authority for county to erect courthouse. (1884) Robertson v. Breedlove, 61 Tex. 316. $9,000, Waxahachie, City of, Texas. Town school bonds would have exceeded limit of indebted- ness, besides there was lack of statutory authority. Contract to issue same for purchase of school building was unenforceable. (1887) City of Waxahachie v. Brown, 67 Tex. 519; 4 S. W. 207. UTAH $22,500, Heber City, Utah. Resolution reciting bonds were to be issued for "corporate purpose" failed to adequately express purpose. Intention was to use proceeds for constructing electric lighting plant. Issue enjoined. (1909) State ex rel. Willis v. Heber City, 102 Pac. 309. VERMONT $50,000, Lunenburgh, Town of, Vt. Commissioners filed but failed to record certificate of assents to issue of railroad aid bonds by town. Issuance could not be 94 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID compelled. (1876) Essex County R. Co. v. Selectmen, etc., of Lunenburgh, 49 Vt. 143. VIRGINIA $2,000, Alexandria, City of, Va. Actual loss. Dr. Fairfax owned stock of city of Alexandria which was confiscated by city and sold to Webb. Webb re- turned the stock to the city and received $2,000 in bonds. Dr. Fairfax then sued city and recovered his stock and then city sued Webb to cancel his bonds. Held, confiscation sale was a nullity and Webb's bonds were void. (1880) Webb v. City Council of Alexandria, 33 Grat. 168. $60,000, Culpeper, Town of, Va. Persons allowed to vote were not qualified. Issue of town road bonds enjoined. (1909) Eggborn v. Board of Supervisors of Culpeper County, 63 S. E. 424. $40,000, Lynchburg, City of, Va. City had no authority to guarantee payment of private elec- tric lighting plant bonds; city was enjoined. (1898) Lynchburg. & R. St. Ry. Co. v. Dameron, 28 S. E. 951. $175,000, Parkersburgh District, Va. Issuance and sale of railroad aid bonds of a magisterial dis- trict enjoined because the bonds were to be sold in advance of time of delivery, and the proceeds used to pay l .he subscription instead of using the bonds themselves in payment. (1897) Neale v. County Court, 27 S. E. 371. $10,000, Roanoke County, Va. Actual loss. Statutory authority to make an allowance in money or supplies to soldiers and sailors conferred no express or implied power to issue bonds for such purpose. Bonds void in hands of bona fide holder. (1881) Bonsack & Riser v. Roanoke County, 75 Va. 585. $500, Staunton, City of, Va. Issue of city street improvement bonds enjoined because they would exceed limit of indebtedness. (1905) Robertson v. City of Staunton, 51 S. E. 178. MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 95 WASHINGTON $66,000, Blaine, City of, Wash. Actual loss. City bonds issued to fund invalid street war- rants held void. Mandamus to compel levy of taxes to pay interest denied. (1906) State ex rel. Barnes v. City of Blaine, 87 Pac. 124. $22,000, Harrington, Town of, Wash. Ordinance providing for submitting question for issuance of town waterworks bonds to voters failed to state the object in its title and failed to recite the purpose of the issue, the amount to be raised, the denomination of the bonds, when they would bear date, the time and place of payment, and the rate of inter- est. Issue enjoined by taxpayer. (1909) Hansard v. Green, 103 Pac. 40. $500,000, King Counfy, Wash. Ship canal for the benefit of federal government was not a necessary county purpose, and issue of bonds therefor was en- joined. (1907) State ex rel. Potter v. King County, 88 Pac. 935. $130,000, Snohomish County, Wash. Issue of county bonds enjoined because )f failure to call for bids for the bonds and because the outstanding warrants to be taken up by the issue of the bonds were illegal, as they exceeded the debt limit. (1897) Duryee v. Friars, 50 Pac. 583. $1,500, Snohomish County, School District No. 93 of, Wash. Issued and held void. School district had no authority to issue bonds to pay off warrants when the bonds would exceed the limit of indebtedness; that the bonds although exchanged for the warrants, increased the indebtedness. (1906) State ex rel. Atkinson v. Ross, 86 Pac. 575. WEST VIRGINIA $10,000, Moundsville, Town of, W. Va. Actual loss. Bonds issued for a mining and manufacturing enterprise was not for a municipal or public purpose, and were illegal and void. (1877) Ohio Valley Iron Works v. Town of Moundsville, 11 W. Va. 1. 96 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID $20,000, Parkersburg, City of, W. Va. Actual loss. City bonds issued by authority of a special act to aid a manufacturing enterprise were void because the act was unconstitutional, not being for a public object. (1882) Parkers- burg v. Brown, 106 U. S. 487. WISCONSIN $25,000, Bayfield County, Wis. Actual loss. Was part of issue of $240,000 county railroad aid bonds; $25,000 held void because exceeded debt limit, and the other part held valid. (1898) Crogster v. Bayfield County, 99 Wis. 1;74N. W. 635. , Burlington, Town of, Wis. Actual loss. Election held and town railroad aid bonds issued before act took effect. Were void. Purchaser bound to know law. (1861) Town of Rochester v. Alfred Bank, 13 Wis. 432. $150,000, Janesville, City of, Wis. Actual loss. City charter relied upon as authority for issue of railroad aid bonds had not taken effect. Were void. Pur- chasers bound to know law. (1861) Clark v. City of Janesville, 13 Wis. 414. $100,000, Kaukauna, City of, Wis. City waterworks bonds would exceed debt limit. Issue en- joined. (1896) Earles v. Wells, 68 N. W. 964. $100,000, Kenosha, City of, Wis. City railroad aid bonds issued without authority were void but holder could recover purchase price. (1867) Paul v. City of Kenosha, 22 Wis. 266. $66,000, Kenosha, City of, Wis. Actual loss. Railroad aid bonds issued by city declared void in hands of bona fide purchaser because statute authorizing same failed to provide a definite limit of indebtedness. Not rati- fied by subsequent special statute. (1870) Fisk v. City of Ken- osha, 26 Wis. 23. $6,000, Knight, Town of, Wis. Issue of townhall bonds enjoined. Notice of election was in- MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID 97 valid. Was given twenty-one days before meeting while statute required not less than fifteen days nor more than twenty days' notice. Was signed "T. H." without designation that he was clerk of the town. Notice was not posted in three of the most conspicuous places. Notice that the election would be held at several places was defective when it was to be held at one place. It did not appear that the request for town meeting was signed by twelve freeholders and delivered to the town clerk twenty days before the town meeting. (1892) McVichie v. Town of Knight, 51 N. W. 1094. $7,000, Lima, Town of, Wis. Actual loss. Bona fide holder could not recover although town bonds issued to aid plank-road company recited that they were issued pursuant to an act by legal voters and town super- visors because it did not appear that there had been deposited and recorded in the town clerk's office an affidavit of super- visors of posting notices of election and the application. (1865) Veeder v.. Town of Lima, 19 Wis. 280. $3,000, Ludington, School District No. 5 of the Town of, Wis. Actual loss. School bonds exceeded debt limit and were void because no tax was voted to pay the indebtedness and they were not refunded; lack of authority and no consideration. Recitals did not validate. Bona fide holder not protected. (1902) Montpelier Savings Bank & Trust Co. v. School District No. 5 of the Town of Ludington, 92 N. W. 439. $1,600, Melrose and Irving, Joint School District No. 1 of the Towns of, Wis. Actual loss. School bonds exceeded debt limit, were irreg- ularly issued and were void. Bona fide holder presumed to know limits of manicipalities' power. (1903) Balch v. Beach, 95 N. W. 132. $150,000, Milwaukee, City of, Wis. Proposition submitted to voters of city for building electric plant did not state with sufficient clearness what part was to be expended for construction alone and what part in maintenance. Was part of $500,000 issue. Issue enjoined. (1910) Neacy v. City of Milwaukee, 126 N. W. 8. 98 MUNICIPAL BONDS HELD VOID $800, New London, Village of, Wis. Actual loss. Lack of charter or statutory authority for vil- lage to issue railroad aid bonds. Were void. (1886) Perrin v. City of New London, 30 N. W. 623. , Rochester, Town of, Wis. Actual loss. Election held and town railroad aid bonds issued before act took effect were void. Purchaser bound to know law. (1861) Town of Rochester v. Alfred Bank, 13 Wis. 432. $2,315, Superior, City of, Wis. Actual loss. City had no charter power to issue street im- provement bonds as a general liability. Such bonds were void in hands of innocent purchasers. Purchase money was not re- coverable even though full faith and credit of city was pledged for payment and bonds recited that all conditions precedent had been complied with. (1906) White River Savings Bank v. City of Superior, 148 Fed. 1. Bonds of like character held void in Brattleboro Savings Bank v. Same; Bennington County Savings Bank v. Same; Bellows Falls Savings Bank v. Same, and Wil- mington Savings Bank v. Same, 148 Fed. 10. Note. These bonds appeared to be special assessment bonds. $15,800, Superior, City of, Wis. Actual loss. Lack of authority. Invalid city bonds could not be validated by ratification. The recital in the bonds that it was legal was not binding on city. Every purchaser bound to take notice of the statute under which they were issued. (1902) Uncas National Bank v. City of Superior, 91 N. W. 1004. -, Waterloo, Town of, Wis. Actual loss. Town railroad aid bonds were issued before the act relied upon as authority was published or took effect. Were void for want of authority. (1861) Berliner v. Town of Waterloo, 14 Wis. 378. INDEX OF MUNICIPALITIES References are to Pages Abbeville Co., S. C, 85 Aberdeen, Miss., 53 Aberdeen, S. D., 86 Abilene, Kan., 40 Ackley, la., 36 Ada Co., Idaho, 22 Adams Co., Neb., 60 Agency, Kan., 40 Ainsworth, Neb., 60 Alessandro, Oh., 80 Alexandria, Va., 94 Allegheny Co., N. Y., 67 Allison, la., Independent School District of, 36 Amboy, 111., 23 Ancram, N. Y., 67 Anderson, S. C, 85 Anderson Co., Kan., 41 Andes, N. Y., 67 Arkansas, Ark., 14 Ashley, Mich., 48 Atchison, Kan., 41 Athens, Ga., 20 Athens, Tenn., 87 Atlanta, Ga., 21 Attalla, Ala., 13 Attica, Ind., 34 Aurora, 111., 23 Aurora, Ind., 34 Austin, Tex., 90 B Bates Co., Mo., 55 Baton Rouge, La., 46 Bay City, Mich., 49 Bay County, Mich., 49 Bayfield Co., Wis., 96 Bayonne, N. J., 65 Beatrice, Neb., 60 Bellaire, N. Y., 49 Belport, N. Y., 67 Benton Co., Ind., 34 Bergen Co., N. J., 66 Bethany, Mo., 55 Big Grove, 111., 23 Bishop, 111., 23 Blaine, Wash., 95 Blanchard, Mich., 49 Blue Rapids, Kan., 41 Boise City, Idaho, 22 Bon Homme Co., S. D., 81 Boston, Mass., 48 Bourbon Co., Kan., 41 Brazoria Co., Tex., 90 Brenham, Tex., 90 Brimfield, 111., 24 Broad River, S. C, 85 Brockport, N. Y., 67 Brookings Co., S. D., 87 Brown, Oh., 80 Brownsville, Tenn., 87 Bryan, Oh., 80 Buncombe Co., N. C, 75 Burlington, la., 36 Burlington, Wis., 96 Butler Co., Neb., 60, 61 Baird, Tex., 90 Barbour Co., Kan., 41 Barnes Co., N. D., 78, 79 Batavia, 111., 23 Calaveras Co., Cal., 15 Calliope, la., 36 100 INDEX Campbell Co., Tenn., 87 Canandaigua, N. Y., 68 Caneadea, N. Y., 68 Carroll Co., Miss., 53 Carthage, N. C, 76 Cass Co., N. D., 79 Cedar Rapids, la., 37 Center Township, Kan., 42 Centerville Sta., 111., 24 Centralia, Mo., 56 Charington Co., Mo., 56 Charleston, S. C, 85 Cheboygan Co., Mich., 49 Cherokee, S. C, 85 Chicago, 111., 24 Chicot Co., Ark., 14 Cbillicothe, Mo., 56 Cicero, Ind., 34 Cincinnati, Oh., 80 Claiborne Co., Tenn., 88 Clarendon, Mich., 49 Clark Co., Mo., 56 Clarksdale, Miss., 53 Clarksville, Mo., 56 Cleburne, Tex., 90 Cold Spring, 111., 25 Columbia, Mo., 56 Columbus, Miss., 53 Columbus, Tex., 91 Comanche Co., Kan., 42 Concord, 111., 25 Cook County, 111., 25 Council Bluffs, la., 37 Covington, Ind., 34 Covington, Ky., 45 Coweta Co., Ga., 21 Cranbury, N. J., 66 Crawford Co., Pa., 83 Culpeper, Va., 94 Cumberland, Md., 48 Daviess Co., Ind., 35 Daviess Co., Ky., 45 Daviess Co., Mo., 57 Dayton, 111., 25 Delaware Co., Ind., 35 Denison, Tex., 91 Denver, Colo., 19 Detroit, Mich., 49 Detroit, Minn., 51 Dixon County, Neb., 61 Donaldsonville, La., 46 Doon, la., 37 Dougherty Co., Ga., 21 Douglas, N. Y., 68 Dublin, Ga., 21 Duluth, Minn., 51 Durham, N. C, 76 Dyersburg, Tenn., 88 E Eagle, 111., 25 East Grand Forks, Minn., 52 East Moline, 111., 26 East Oakland, 111., 26 East St. Louis, 111., 26 Ector Co., Tex., 91 Edgewood, Ga., 21 Elberton, Ga., 21 Elgin, Minn., 52 Elko, Nev., 65 Ellicott, N. Y., 68 Elmwood, 111., 26 Elyria, Oh., 80 Enfield, III., 26 Eufaula, Ala., 13 Eutaw, Ala., 13 Fargo, Kan., 42 Fargo, N. D., 79 Faulkenstein, Kan., 42 Florence, S. C, 86 Fordsville, Ky., 45 Fort Edward, N. Y., 69 Franklin Co., 111., 26 Franklin Co., Neb., 61 Fremont, Neb., 61 Fulton Co., 111., 27 INDEX 101 G Gaffney, S. C, 86 Galveston, Tex., 91 Genoa, N. Y., 69 Gillett, Colo., 19 Gilman, la., 37 Goldsboro, N. C., 76 Gorham, N. Y., 69 Granada, Colo., 19 Grand Forks, N. D., 79 Grand Rapids, Mich., 50 Grangeville, Idaho, 22 Grant, Neb., 61 Graymount, Ala., 13 Green Co., Ky., 45 Green Co., Pa., 83 Greenwich, N. Y., 69 Greenwood, N. Y., 70 H Hamilton, Oh., 81 Hamilton, Tenn., 88 Hancock, N. Y., 70 Hancock Co., Oh., 81 Hardin Co., 111., 27 Harrington, Wash., 95 Haverstraw, N. Y., 70 Hawkins, Tenn., 88 Hawkinsville, Ga., 21 Hazlehurst, Miss., 54 Heber City, Utah, 93 Hebron, Conn., 20 Helena, Mont., 60 Hemphill Co., Tex., 91 Hempstead, N. Y., 70 Hempstead, Tex., 91 Hendersonville, N. C, 76 Henry Co., la., 37 Highland Co., Oh., 81 Hillsborough Co., Fla., 20 Holly Springs, Miss., 54 Hollywood, Cal., 15 Honey Creek, 111., 27 Howard Co., Tex., 91 Hudson Co., N. J., 66 Hume, N. Y., 70 Huron, S. D., 87 Iberville, La., 47 Ingalls, Kan., 42 Iola, Kan., 43 Ironwood, Mich., 50 Irving, Wis., 97 Jackson, la., 36 Jackson Co., 111., 27 Jackson Co., N. C, 76 Janesville, Wis., 96 Jamaica, N. Y., 70 Jeffersonville, Ind., 35 Jersey Co., 111., 27 Johnson Co., la., 37 Johnson Co., Kan., 43 Johnson, Tenn., 88 Joliet, 111., 27 K Kankakee, 111., 27 Kansas City, Kan., 43 Kaukauna, v Wis., 96 Kearney Co., Kan., 43 Kendall Co., 111., 28 Kenosha, Wis., 96 Keokuk, la., 38 Kern Co., Cal., 15 Kidder Co., N. D., 79 King Co., Wash., 95 Knight, Wis., 96 Knox Co., Tex., 88 Lacon, 111., 28 Lafayette, Ind., 35 102 INDEX Lafayette Co., Mo., 57 La Grange, Mo., 57 Lake Co., Colo., 19 Lamard, 111., 28 LaMoille, 111., 28 Lamotte, Mich., 50 Lancaster, Pa., 83 Lansing, N. Y., 71 La Salle Co., 111., 28 Lathrop, Mo., 57 Lawrence Co., Pa., 83 Lawrence Co., Tenn., 89 Leavenworth, Kan., 43 Ledyard, N. Y., 71 Lee Co., la., 38 Lexington, Ky., 45 Lima, Wis., 97 Lincoln, Neb., 62 Lincoln Co., Mo., 57 Lincoln Co., Neb., 62 Litchfield, 111., 28 Little Rock, Ark., 14 Lone Tree, la., 38 Louisiana, Mo., 57 Louisville, Ky., 46 Ludington, Wis., 97 Lunenburgh, Vt., 93 Lynchburg, Va., 94 Lyon Co., la., 38 M McColl, S. C, 86 McLean Co., 111., 29 Macon Co., Mo., 58 Madison, Ind., 35 Madison Co., 111., 29 Madison Co., Miss., 54 Mamakating, N. Y., 71 Manchester, N. J., 66 Marceline, Mo., 58 Marion, Mo., 58 Marshall Co., la., 38 Marshall Co., Oh., 81 Mecosta, Mich., 50 Melrose, Wis., 97 Memphis, Mo., 58 Memphis, Tenn., 89 Mentz, N. Y., 71 Mercer Co., Pa., 83 Miami Co., Kan., 43 Middleport, 111., 29 Milan, Tenn., 89 Millerstown, Pa., 83 Milwaukee, Wis., 97 Mineral Ridge, Oh., 81 Mitchell Co., Tex., 92 Moberly, Mo., 58 Monroe Co., 111., 29 Montgomery, Ala., 13 Montgomery Co., Ky., 46 Monticello, Ind., 35 Morgan Co., 111., 29 Moundsville, W. Va., 95 Mt. Morris, N. Y., 71 Mt. Pleasant, la., 38 Murfreesboro, N. C, 77 Musldngum Co., Oh., 82 N Nebraska, Neb., 62 Neligh, Neb., 62 Neosho Falls, Kan., 43 Nevada, Mo., 58 New Athens, 111., 29 New Hanover, N. C, 77 New London, Wis., 98 Newport, Ky., 46 Newton Co., Ind., 35 Nolan Co., Tex., 92 Norfolk, Neb., 62 Northampton, N. Y., 72 Nuckolls Co., Kan., 44 O Ogdensburgh, N. Y., 72 Okolona, Miss., 54 Omaha, Neb., 62, 63 Oneida, N. Y., 72 Ontario, N. Y., 72 Oquawka, 111., 30 Orleans, N. Y., 72 INDEX 103 Osawkee, Kan., 44 Oswego, Kan., 44 Otoe Co., Neb., 63 Ottawa, 111., 30 Ottawa, Town of, 111., 30 Ottumwa, Ga., 22 Ottumwa, la., 39 Ouray Co., Colo., 20 Oxford, Kan., 44 Oxford, N. C, 77 Pana, 111., 30 Paris, Tex., 92 Parkersburg, Va., 94 Parkersburg, W. Va., 96 Parkland, Ky., 46 Park Ridge, N. J., 66 Paterson, N. J., 66 Paw Paw, Mich., 50 Perkins Co., Neb., 63 Perris, Cal., 15 Perry, Ga., 22 Perry Co., 111., 31 Phelps, N. Y., 72 Philadelphia, Pa., 84 Phillips Co., Ark., 14 Pierce Co., N. D., 79 Pima County, Ariz., 14 Pittsburgh, Pa., 84 Placerville, Cal., 15 Plain view, Minn., 52 Plaqueminer, La., 47 Platte Co., Mo., 59 Plattsmouth, Neb., 63 Polk Co., la., 39 Pontotoc Co., Miss., 55 Porter, Oh., 82 Port Huron, Mich., 50 Prince George Co., Md., 48 Pulaski Co., 111., 31 R Rainsburgh Borough, Pa., 85 Ramsey Co., Minn., 52 Redondo Beach, Cal., 16 Red River, La., 47 Richardson Co., Neb., 64 Richland Co., III., 31 Rienzi, Miss., 55 Riverside, Cal., 15 Riverside, la., 39 Riverton, N. J., 67 Roanoke Co., Va., 94 Roberts, 111., 31 Rochester, N. Y., 73 Rochester, Wis., 98 Rockford, Oh., 82 Rock Hill, S. C, 86 Rockingham Co., N. C, 77 Rock Rapids, la., 39 Rocksbury, Minn., 52 Romulus, N. Y., 73 Rosedale, Miss., 55 S Sacramento, Cal., 16 Sacramento Co., Cal., 16 St. Augustine, Fla., 20 St. Bernard, La., 47 St. Croix Co., Mich., 51 St. Joseph, Mo., 59 St. Lawrence, S. D., 87 Salem, Mich., 51 Salem, Mo., 59 Saline Co., Mo., 59 San Diego, Cal., 16 San Francisco, Cal., 17, 18 San Luis Obispo, Cal., 17 San Luis Obispo Co., Cal., 17 Santa Cruz, Cal., 18 Santa Rosa, Cal., 18 Saratoga, N. Y., 73 Saratoga Springs, N. Y., 73 Sauk Rapids, Minn., 53 Schuyler Co., 111., 32 Scott Co., la., 40 Senoia, Ga., 22 Seward Co., Neb., 64 Shawangunk, N. Y., 73 104 INDEX Shawnee Co., Kan., 44 Shawneetown, 111., 32 Shelby Co., Tenn., 89 Shelton, Neb., 64 Sherman Co., Neb., 64 Shiawassee Co., Mich., 51 Shreveport, La., 47 Silverbow Co., Mont., 59 Sniabar, Mo., 59 Snohomish Co., Wash., 95 Sny Island, 111., 32 Sodus Pt., N. Y., 73 Southfield, N. Y., 73 South Ottawa, 111., 32 Sparta, 111., 32 Springfield, HI., 32 Springport, N. Y., 74 Spring Valley, Kan., 44 Stanley Co., N. C, 77 Staunton, Va., 94 Steamboat Rock, la., 40 Sterling, N. Y., 74 Stillwater, Minn., 53 Stites, 111., 33 Stockton, N. Y., 74 Sullivan, 111., 33 Superior, Wis., 98 Suspension Bridge, N. Y., 74 Sutter Co., Cal., 18 Talbot Co., Md., 48 Tazewell, HI., 33 Tensas, La., 48 Terrell, Tex., 93 Thomasville, Ga., 22 Thompson, N. Y., 75 Thurston Co., Neb., 65 Topeka, Kan., 45 Troy, N. Y., 75 Turlock, Cal., 18 U Union Co., Ore., 82 Urbana, 111., 33 Valley Co., Neb., 65 Valleytown, N. C, 78 Venice, N. Y., 75 Vicksburgh, Miss., 55 W Waco, Tex., 93 Wapello Co., la., 40 Washington, N. C, 78 Washington Co., la., 40 Washington Co., Tex., 93 Waterloo, Wis., 98 Waxahachie, Tex., 93 Wayne Co., Neb., 65 Waynesboro., Ga., 22 Wellsborough, N. Y., 75 Westwood, Oh., 82 Wetumpka, Ala., 14 White Co., 111., 33 Williamston, N. C, 78 Wilmette, 111., 33 Wilmington, N. C, 78 Winamac, Ind., 36 Winnetka, 111., 34 Winslow, N. J., 67 Woodbury, N. Y., 75 Woodbury Co., la., 40 Wooster, Oh., 82 Yellowstone Co., Mont., 60 York, Neb., 65 INDEX OF CASES References are to Pages Adams County, State ex rel. Bowen v., 60 Adirondack County, People ex rel. Averill v., 72 Mtna, Life Insurance Co. v. Lyon County, 38 jEtna Life Insurance Co., Town of Middleport v., 29 Aldrich, Williamson v., 86 Alessandro Irrigation District v. Savings & Trust Co., 80 Alexander, City of Joliet v., 27 Alfred Bank, Town of Rochester v., 96, 98 Allen, People ex rel. Yawger v., 74 Allen, State ex rel. City of Bethany v., 55 Altaffer v. Nelson, 80 Amoskeag Bank v. Ottawa, 30 Anderson v. Orient Fire Insurance Co., 38 Angel v. Town of Hume, 70 Anthony v. County of Jasper, 58 Ashuelot National Bank of Keene v. School District No. 7, Valley County, 65 Aspinwall v. Commissioners of Daviess County, 35 Atkinson v. Board of Commissioners of Ada County, 22 Avery v. Springport, 74 B Babcock, State ex rel. City of Fre- mont v., 61 Babcock, State ex rel. City of Lin- coln v., 62 Babcock, State ex rel. City of Wiant v., 61 Babcock, State ex rel. City of York v., 65 Babcock, State ex rel. Otoe County v., 63 Baird Independent School District, Snyder v., 90 Baker, People ex rel. Kern County v., 15 Balch v. Beach, 97 Ballou, Litchfield v., 28 Baltimore & E. S. R. Co. v. Spring, 48 Bangor Savings Bank v. City of Stillwater, 53 Barbour County, Lewis v., 41 Barnard v. Hawkins County, 88 Barnes v. Town of Lacon, 28 Barnet, City of Paterson v., 66 Barnett v. Denison, 91 Barnum v. Okolona, 54 Batchellor, People ex rel. D. St. & P. R. Co. v., 74 Bates v. Independent District of Riverside, 39 Bates County, Edwards v., 55 Bates County, Harshman v., 55 Bates County v. Winters, 55 Bayard, Meek v., 83 Bayfield County, Crogster v., 96 Beach, Balch v., 97 Belknap v. City of Louisville, 46 Bellows Falls Savings Bank v. City of Superior, 98 Bennett, Martin v., 59 Bennington County Savings Bank v. City of Superior, 98 Benton, Getchell v., 62 106 INDEX Benton, State ex rel. Board of Edu- cation v., 63 Benton, State ex rel. City of Bea- trice v., 60. Berkley v. Board of Education, 46 Berliner v. Town of Waterloo, 98 Bethel, City of Memphis v., 89 Biddle ». Mayor, etc., of Borough of Riverton, 67 Birkholz v. Dinnie, 79 Bissel v. Spring Valley Township, 45 Bissell v. City of Kankakee, 27 Blair & Co. v. City of Waco, 93 Board of Commissioners v. Union Bank, 77 Board of Commissioners of Ada County, Atkinson v., 22 Board of Commissioners of Dela- ware County v. McClintock, 35 Board of Commissioners of Jackson County, Wittowsky v., 76 Board of Commissioners of Kearney Co., Coffin v., 43 iBoard of Commissioners of Newton Co., State v., 35 Board of Commissioners of Sherman Co., State ex rel. Short v., 65 Board of Commissioners of Wood- son Co., Turner v., 42 Board of Education, Berkley v., 46 Board of Education, Broad v., 46 Board of Education of City of Atchison v. Kansas, 41 Board of Education of Cranbury Township, State v., 66 Board of Education of Normal School District, Hewitt v., 29 Board of Education v. Sinton, 82 Board of Park Commissioners, City of Louisville v., 46 Board of Supervisorsof Bay County, Shearer v., 49 Board of Supervisors v. Brush, 27 Board of Supervisors of Culpeper County, Eggborn v., 94 Board of Supervisors of Madison County v. Paxton, 54 Board of Supervisors of Polk County, Witter v., 39 Board of Supervisors of Sacramento County, Devine v., 16 Board of Supervisors of Schuyler County v. People ex rel. Rock Island & Alton R. R. Co., 32 Board of Trustees of Fordsville v. Postel, 45 Bogart v. Township of Lamotte, 50 Bolles v. Perry Co., 31 Bon Homme County, Brown v., 86 Bonsack & Kiser v. Roanoke County, 94 Borough of Millerstown v. Fred- erick, 84 Bourbon County, Lewis v., 42 Bowman, Schaeffer v., 28 Bowman, Schall v., 26 Boyles, McMillan v., 38 Brandenstein v. Hoke, 18 Brattleboro Savings Bank v. City of Superior, 98 Braun, Kirsch v., 34 Brazoria County v. Youngstown Bridge Co., 90 Breaux v. Parish of Iberville, 47 Breed, Town of Venice v., 75 Breedlove, Robertson v., 93 Brenham v. German American Bank, 90 Briant, McCoy v., 16 Brinkworth v. Grable, 60 Britton, Police Jury v., 48 Broad v. Board of Education, 46 Broad River Township, Coleman v., 85 Broaddus, Town of Clarksdale v., 53 Brooklyn Trust Co. v. Town of Hebron, 20 Brooks, Claiborne County v., 88 Brown v. Bon Homme County, 86 Brown v. Carl, 38 Brown v. City of Atchison, 41 Brown, City of Waxahachie v., 93 Brown, Duke v., 76 Brown v. Ingalls Township, 42 Brown, Parkersburg v., 96 INDEX 107 Brownsville, Norton v., 87 Brown Township, Hopple v., 80 Bruce v. City of Pittsburgh, 85 Brush, Board of Supervisors v., 27 Buchanan v. Litchfield, 28 Bullitt v. City of Philadelphia, 84 Burnett v. Maloney, 89 Butler County, Frank v., 61 Butler, Johnson v., 47 Cagwin v. Town of Hancock, 70 Cahill v Hogan, 75 Cain v Smith, 21 Cairo & St. L. R. Co. v. City of Sparta, 32 Campbell, Coates v., 53 Carey, Ottawa v., 30 Carl, Brown v., 38 Carlin, Morton v., 62 Carpenter v. Inhabitants of Town of Lathrop, 57 Carroll County, Hawkins v., 53 Carroll County v. Smith, 53 Carter, Shawnee County v., 44 Casady v. Woodbury County, 40 Case v. City of Sullivan, 33 Cate, City of Redondo Beach v., 16 Central Branch U. P. R. Co. v. Smith, 41 Chamberlain v. City of Burlington, 36 Charleston, C. & C. R. Co., City of Johnson City v., 88 Chase v. Gilbert, 86 Chattanooga W. R. Co., Colburn v., 88 Chelsea Savings Bank v. City of Ironwood, 50 Cherokee Township, Graniss v., 86 Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co. v. City of Aurora, 23 Chicago, K. & W. Ry. Co. v. Free- man, 41 Chicot County, English & W. v., 14 Chicot County, Hancock v., 14 Chisholm ». Montgomery, 13 Chitty, Debnam v., 77 Chosen Freeholders of Hudson, Siedler v., 66 Citizens' Bank v. City of Terrell, 93 Citizens' S. & L. A. v. Perry County, 31 City and County of Denver v. Hal- lett, 19 City and County of San Francisco, Fritz v., 17 City and County of San Francisco, Law v., 18 City and County of San Francisco, Liebman v., 18 City and County of San Francisco, McHugh v., 17 City and County of San Francisco, Shapter »., 17 City Council of Alexandria, Webb v., 94 City Council of Charleston, Feld- man & Co. v., 85 City National Bank, Mitchell Co. v., 92 City of Aberdeen, Katzenberger v., 53 City of Abilene, Edminson v., 40 City of Arkansas, Hinkley v., 14 City of Arkansas, Swan v., 14 City of Atchison, Brown v., 41 City of Atlanta, Gavin v., 21 City of Attalla, Gutta Percha & Rubber Mfg. Co., v. 13 City of Attica, I., N. & S. R. Co. v., 34 City of Aurora, Chicago, B. A. R. R. Co. v., 23 City of Aurora v. West, 34 City of Austin, Nalle v., 90 City of Baton Rouge, Knox v., 46 City of Bayonne, State v., 66 City of Blaine, State ea; rel. Barnes v., 95 City of Boston, Lowell v., 48 City of Burlington, Chamberlain v., 36 City of Cedar Rapids, Reed v., 37 108 INDEX City of Chicago, Fuller ». 24 City of Chicago, Lobdell v., 24 City of Cincinnati v. Guckenberger, 80 City of Clarksville, Gause v., 56 City of Columbus v. Woonsocket Institution for Savings, 91 City of Covington v. McKenna, 45 City of Denver v. Hayes, 19 City of Duluth, Moore »., 51 City of E. Grand Forks, Purcell v., 52 City of Elberton, Oliver v., 21 City of Elyria, Elyria Gas and Water Co. v., 81 City of Eufala v. McNab, 13 City of Fargo, Stern v., 79 City of Goldsboro, Robinson v., 76 City of Grand Rapids, Farr v., 50 City of Graymount v. Scott, 13 City of Grangeville, Woodward v., 23 City of Hamilton, Hensly v., 81 City of Hazlehurst v. Mayer, 54 City of Helena, Palmer v., 60 City of Hempstead, Peck v., 91 City of Huron, John Hancock Mu- tual Life Insurance Co. v., 87 City of Iola, National Bank v., 43 City of Ironwood, Chelsea Savings Bank v., 50 City of Ironwood, Manhattan Co. v., 50 City of Janesville, Clark v., 96 City of Jeffersonville, Myers v., 35 City of Johnson City ». Charleston, C. & C. Ry. Co., 88 City of Joliet v. Alexander, 27 City of Kankakee, Bissell v., 27 City of Kansas City, State ex rel. Miller »., 43 City of Kenosha, Fisk v., 96 City of Kenosha, Paul v., 96 City of Keokuk, Williamson v., 38 City of Lancaster, Houston »., 83 City of Lafayette v. Cox, 35 City of Leavenworth v. Wilson, 43 City of Louisville, Belknap v., 46 City of Louisville v. Board of Park Commissioners, 46 City of Madison v. Smith, 35 City of Marceline, Prickett v., 58 City of Memphis v. Bethel, 89 City of Memphis, Dodge v., 58 City of Memphis, Hill v., 58 City of Milwaukee, Neacy v., 97 City of Nevada, Morton v., 59 City of New London, Perrin v., 98 City of Norfolk, Painter v., 64 City of Omaha, Tukey v., 62 City of Oneida v. King, 72 City of Ottawa, Mather v., 30 City of Ottumwa v. City Water Supply Co., 22 City of Ottumwa, Swanson v., 39 City of Paris, Gould v., 92 City of Paterson v. Barnet, 66 City of Philadelphia, Bullitt v., 84 City of Philadelphia, Pepper v., 84 City of Pittsburgh, Bruce v., 85 City of Pittsburgh, Hoffman v., 24 City of Placerville, Wichman v., 16 City of Plattsmouth v. Fitzgerald, 63 City of Plattsmouth, Wheeler v., 63 City of Port Huron, Thomas v., 50 City of Redondo Beach v. Cate, 16 City of Rienzi, Greene v., 55 City of Sacramento, Kennedy v., 16 City of St. Augustine, Middleton v., 20 City of San Diego, Lehman v., 16 City of San Luis Obispo, Murphy v., 17 City of Santa Rosa, Skinner v., 18 City of Shreveport, Lewis v., 47 City of Shreveport, Scott's Exrs. v., 47 City of Shreveport, Wilson v., 48 City of Sparta, Cairo & St. L. R. Co. »., 32 City of Springfield v. Edwards, 32 City of Staunton, Robertson v., 94 INDEX 109 City of Stillwater, Bangor Savings Bank v., 53 City of Sullivan, Case v., 33 City of Superior, Bellows Falls Sav- ings Bank v., 98 City of Superior, Bennington Co. Savings Bank v., 98 City of Superior, Brattleboro Sav- ings Bank v., 98 City of Superior, Uncas National Bank v., 98 City of Superior, White River Sav- ings Bank v., 98 City of Superior, Wilmington Sav- ings Bank v., 98 City of Terrell, Citizens' Bank v., 93 City of Terrell, Millsaps v., 93 City of Thomasville v. Thomasville Electric light & Gas Co., 22 City of Vicksburg, Smith v., 55 City of Waco t Blair & Co. v., 93 City of Waxahacbie v. Brown, 93 City of Waynesboro, Wukins v., 22 City of Wilmington, Weith & Arents v., 78 City of Wooster, Keehn v., 82 City Water Supply Co., City of ' Ottumwa »., 22 Claggett ». Duluth Township, 52 Claiborne County ». Brooks, 88 Clarendon, Young v., 49 Clark County, Whitford »., 56 Clark v. City of Janesville, 96 Clark v. Town of Rosedale, 55 Clark v. Town of Northampton, 72 Claybrook v. Commissioners of Rockingham County, 77 Cleburne, Coler v., 90 Clegg v. School District, 64 Cleveland, George v., 64 Coates v. Campbell, 53 Coffin v. Board of Commissioners of Kearney County, 43 Coffin v. Richards, 22 Cogwin v. Town of Hancock, 74 Coler v. Cleburne, 90 Colburn v. Chattanooga, 88 Cole v. LaGrange, 57 Coleman v. Broad River Township, 85 Coleman v. Town of Eutaw„13 Coler, Stanley County v., 78 Comanche County, Lewis v., 42 Commissioners of Anderson County, Paola & Fall River Ry. Co. v., 41 Commissioners of Buncombe County v. Payne, 76 Commissioners of Daviess County, Aspinwall v., 35 Commissioners of Hancock County, State ex rd. Treadwell v., 81 Commissioners of Lincoln County, State ex rel. Grady v., 62 Commissioners of New Hanover County v. DeRossett, 77 Commissioners of Ramsey County, Goodnow v., 52 Commissioners of Richardson Co., Dundy v., 64 Commissioners of Rockingham Co., Claybrook v., 77 Commissioners of Stanley County v. Snuggs, 78 Commissioners of Town of Hender- sonville v. C. A. Webb & Co., 76 Commissioners of Town of Oxford, Union Bank v., 77 Common Council of Detroit, Peo- ple v., 50 Concord v. Robinson, 25 Cook v. Town of Mentz, 71 Cook, Dent v., 21 Cook, Marshall County v., 81 Cook, Strang v., 71 Coquard v. Village of Oquawka, 30 Corbet v. Town of Rocksbury, 53 County Court, Neale v., 94 County of Bergen v. Merchants' Bank, 66 County of Crawford v. Pittsburgh & Erie R. R. Co., 83 County of Daviess, Ogden v., 57 County of Hardin v. McFarlin, 27 County of Jasper, Anthony v., 58 County of Johnson, Myers v., 37 110 INDEX County of Marshall, Hull & Ar- galls v., 38 County of Miami, M. R. Ft. S. & Y. R. Co. v., 43 County of Platte, Dodge v., 59 County of Scott, Stokes v., 40 County of Tazewell, People v., 33 County of Wapello, State v., 40 Covington, C. & B. R. R. Co., Reineman v., 65 Cowdrey v. Town of Caneadea, 68 Cox, City of Lafayette v., 35 Craig v. Town of Andes, 67 Crane, Hughson v., 18 Crogster v. Bayfield County, 96 Crow v. Oxford, 44 Culberson, Hendrick v., 91 Culver v. Village of Fort Edward, 59 Cummins, Doon Township v., 37 D Dameron, Lynchburg & R. St. Ry. Co. v., 95 Daviess County v. Dickinson, 45 Davis v. Dougherty Co., 21 Davison, Locke v., 27 Dayton, Gilson v., 25 Debnam v. Chitty, 77 Denison, Barnet v., 91 Dent v . Cook, 21 DeRossett, Commissioners of New Hanover Co. v., 77 Devine v. Board of Supervisors of Sacramento Co., 16 Deyoe, People ex rel. Town of Rochester v., 73 Diamond v. Lawrence County, 83 Dickinson, Daviess County v., 45 Dinnie, Birkholz v., 79 District Township of Doon, First National Bank v., 37 Dixon County v. Field, 61 Dixon County, Hedges v., 61 Dodge v. City of Memphis, 58 Dodge v. County of Platte, 59 Dodge v. Van Buren, 50 Doon Township v. Cummins, 37 Dougherty Co., Davis v., 21 Douglas v. Lincoln County, 57 Dow, Joslyn v., 72 Duckett v. National Bank, 48 Duke v. Brown, 76 Duluth Township, Claggett v., 52 Dundy v. Commissioners of Rich- ardson County, 64 Dunnigan, Wullenwaher v., 64 Dupuyt, People ex rel. Cairo & St. Louis Ry. Co., 29 Duryee v. Friars, 95 Dutcher, People v., 23 Dyersburg, Norton v., 88 E Earles v. Wells, 96 East Riverside Irrigation District, Wright v., 15 Eaton v. Mimnaugh, 82 Eddy v. People ex rel. Nolan, 32 Edminson v. City of Abilene, 40 Edwards, City of Springfield v., 32 Edwards v. Bates County, 55 Eggborn v. Board of Supervisors of Culpeper County, 94 Elgin, Winona & St. Peter Rail- road v., 52 Ellison v. Town of Williamston, 78 Elyria Gas & Water Co. v. City of Elyria, 81 English & W. v. Chicot County, 14 Erwin v. St. Joseph Board of Public Schools, 59 Essex County R. Co. v. Select- men, 94 Everett v. Independent School Dis- trict of Rock Rapids, 40 F Falconer, Railroad Co. v., 68 Fargo Township, Sage v., 42 Farr v. City of Grand Rapids, 50 Faulkenstein Township v. Fitch, 42 Favalora v. Police Jury, 47 INDEX 111 Feldman & Co. v. City Council of Charleston, 85 Fernald v. Town of Gilman, 37 Fidelity Trust & Safety Vault Co. v. Lawrence Co., 89 Field, Dixon County v., 61 First National Bank v. District Township of Doon, 37 First National Bank of Portsmouth, Ottawa v., 30 Fish, Village of Fort Edwards v., 69 Fisk v. City of Kenosha, 96 Fitch, Faulkenstein Township v., 42 Fitzgerald, City of Plattsmouth v., 63 Flack v. Hughes, 30 Flagg v. School District No. 70, Barnes County, 78 Floyd v. Perrin, 85 Foote v. Mt. Pleasant, 38 Force v. Town of Batavia, 23 Francis v. Howard County, 91 Frank v. Butler County, 61 Franklin County, German Savings Bank v., 26 Franklin, People ex rel. Sutton v., 73 Franklin Savings Bank, Town of Springport v., 74 Frederick, Borough of Millerstown v., 84 Freeman, C. K. & W. Ry. Co. v., 40 Friars, Duryee v., 95 Frick v. Mercer County, 83 Fritz v. City and County of San Francisco, 17 Fuller v. City of Chicago, 24 Fullerton v. School District of Lin- coln, 62 Fulton County, Marsh v., 27 Furman, St. Lawrence Township v., 87 Fyan, Rainsburgh Borough v., 85 G Gaddis v. Richland County, 31 Gains, Town of Parkland v., 46 Galveston, Hitchcock v., 91 Gause v. City of Clarksville, 56 Geer v. School District, 20 George v. Cleveland, 64 George v. Township of Oxford, 44 German American Bank, Brenham v., 90 Germania Savings Bank v. Village of Suspension Bridge, 75 German Savings Bank v. Franklin County, 26 German Uptown Savings Bank, Town of Springport v., 74 Getchell v. Benton, 62 Gilbert, Chase v., 86 Gilson v. Dayton, 25 Goodnow v. Commissioners of Ram- sey County, 52 Goodwin, Miller v., 23 Gould v. City of Paris, 92 Gould v. Town of Sterling, 74 Grable, Brinkworth v., 60 Grace v. Mayor, etc., of Hawkins- ville, 21 Graham, Lake County v., 20 Grannis v. Cherokee Township, 86 Graves v. Moore County, 76 Graves, Village of Oquawka v., 30 Green County v. Shortell, 45 Green, Hansard v., 95 Green, Village of Brockport v., 68 Greene v. City of Rienzi, 55 Guckenberger, City of Cincinnati v., 79 Gutta Percha & R. Mfg. Co. v. City of Attalla, 13 H Hackett v. Ottawa, 30 Hallett, City and County of Den- ver v., 19 Hamilton v. Village of Detroit, 51 Hamlin v. Meadville, 63 Hamm, McConnell v., 43 Hancock v. Chicot County, 14 Hansard v. Green, 95 112 INDEX Hardenburgh u. Van Keuren, 73 Harrington v. Plainview Railroad Company, 52 Harrington v. Town of Plainview, 52 Harshman v. Bates County, 55 Hatch, People ex rel. Angel v., 67 Hausworth v. Mueller, 60 Hawkins v. Carroll County, 53 Hawkins County, Barnard v., 88 Hayes, City of Denver v., 19 Hayes v. Holly Springs, 54 Hayes, Village of Canandaigua v., 68 Heber City, State ex rel. Willis v., 93 Hedges v. Dixon County, 61 Hemerick, Mayor, etc., of City of Athens v., 20 Henderson, Hillsborough County v., 20 Hendrick t». Culberson, 91 Henry County, Smith v., 37 Hensly v. City of Hamilton, 81 Hewitt v. Board of Education of Normal School District, 29 Highway Commissioners of Valley- town Township v. Webb & Co., 78 Hildebrant, Holliday v., 36 Hill v. City of Memphis, 58 Hillsborough County v. Henderson, 20 Hinkley v. City of Arkansas, 14 Hitchcock v. Galveston, 91 Hixon, Miller v., 81 Hoffman v. City of Pittsburgh, 84 Hogan, Cahill v., 75 Hoke, Brandenstein v., 18 Holliday v. Hildebrant, 36 Holly Springs, Hayes v., 54 Hollywood U. S. D. v. Keyes, 15 Hopkins, Polly v., 91 Hopper v. Town of Covington, 35 Hopple v. Brown Township, 80 Horsky v. Hughes, 80 Horton v. Town of Thompson, 75 Houston v. City of Lancaster, 83 Howard County, Francis v., 91 Huck, Law v., 24 Huddleston, Town of Winamac v., 36 Hudson v. Inhabitants of Winslow, 67 Hughes, Flack v., 30 Hughes v. Horsky, 80 Hughitt, People ex rel. Delafield v., 71 Hughson v. Crane, 18 Hulbert, Sweet v., 73 Hulburt, People ex rel. Freeman v., 73 Hull & Argulls v. County of Mar- shall, 38 Hurlburt, Jones v., 64 Independent School District of Ackley, Bates v., 39 Independent School District of Ackley, Mosher v., 36 Independent School District of Rock Rapids, Everett v., 40 Independent School District, Shaw v., 39 Indiana N. & S. R. Co. v. City of Attica, 34 Ingalls Township, Brown v., 42 Ingham, McMullen v., 49 Inhabitants of Town of Lathrop, Carpenter v., 57 Inhabitants of Winslow, Hudson v., 67 Illinois Grand Trunk Railway Com- pany v. Wade, 28 Jackson County, People ex rel. Cairo & St. L. R. R. Co. v., 27 January v. Johnson County, 43 Jarrolt v. Moberly, 58 Jeffries v. Lawrence, 37 Jenkins v . Newman, 60 John Hancock Mutual Life Insur- ance Co. v. City of Huron, 87 INDEX 113 Johnson v. Butler, 47 Johnson v. Roddey, 86 Johnson County, January v., 43 Jones v. Hurlburt, 64 Joslyn v. Dow, 72 Justices of Campbell Co. v. Knox- ville & Ky. R. Co., 88 K Kansas, Board of Education of City of Atchison v., 41 Katzenberger v. City of Aberdeen, 53 Keehn v. City of Wooster, 82 Kelley v. Milan, 89 Kennedy v. City of Sacramento, 16 Kentucky Midland Ry. Co., Whit- ney v., 46 Keyes, Hollywood U. S. D. v., 15 King, City of Oneida v., 72 King County, State ex rel. Potter v., 95 Kirch v . Braun, 34 Knox v. City of Baton Rouge, 46 Knoxville & K. R. Co., Justices of Campbell County v. 88 Kohn, Town of Eagle v., 25 Kron, Santa Cruz Water Co. v., 18 Kyes v. St. Croix County, 51 Lawrence, Jeffries v., 37 Leeman v. Perris Irrigation Dis- trict, 15 Lehman v. City of San Diego, 16 Leslie v. Urbana, 33 Lewis v. Barbour County, 41 Lewis v. Bourbon County, 42 Lewis v. City of Shreveport, 47 Lewis v. Comanche County, 42 Lewis v. Pima County, 14 Liebman v. City and County of San Francisco, 18 Lincoln County, Douglas v., 57 Lincoln & N. W. R. Co., Spurch v., Lippincott v. Town of Pana, 30 61 Lipscomb, Ross v., 86 Lisso v. Parish of Red River, 47 Litchfield v. Ballou, 28 Litchfield, Buchanan v., 28 Livingston v. School District, 87 Loan Association v. Topeka, 45 Lobdell v. City of Chicago, 24 Locke v. Davidson, 27 Louisiana v. Wood, 57 Lowell v. City of Boston, 48 Lynch, Ryan v., 30 Lynchburg & R. St. Ry. Co. v. Dameron, 94 Lyon County, jEtna Life Insurance Co. v., 38 Lytle v. Town of Lansing, 71 Lafayette County, Sherrard v., 57 Lafayette County, Webb v., 59 LaGrange, Cole v., 57 Lake County v. Graham, 20 Lake County Commissioners, Sut- liff v., 19 Lansing, Purdy v., 71 Law v. City and County of San Francisco, 18 Law v. Huck, 24 Lawrence County Appeal, 83 Lawrence County, Diamond v., 83 Lawrence County, Fidelity Trust & Safety Vault Co. v., 89 M Macon County, State ex rel. Wat- kins v., 58 Madison County v. People, 29 Magruder, Mayor, etc., of Cumber- land, 48 Maloney, Burnet v., 89 Manhattan Co. v. City of Ironwood, 50 Marionneaux v. Parish of Iberville, 47 Marsh v. Fulton County, 27 Marsh, People ex rel. Moller v., 74 114 INDEX Marsh, People ex rel. Nelson v., 74 Marshall v. Silliman, 24 Marshall County v. Cook, 81 Martin v. Bennett, 59 Martin v. Tyler, 79 Mather v. City of Ottawa, 30 Mayer, City of Hazlehurst v., 54 Mayo v. Town of Washington, 78 Mayor, etc., of Borough of Park Ridge, Mittag v., 66 Mayor, etc., of Borough of River- ton, Biddle v., 67 Mayor, etc., of City of Athens v. Hemerick, 20 Mayor, etc., of Columbus, Sykes v., 54 Mayor, etc., of Cumberland v. Magruder, 48 Mayor of Dublin, Smith v., 21 Mayor, etc., of Duluth, Thruelson ./., 51 Mayor, etc., of Hawkinsville, Grace v., 21 Mayor, etc., of Johnson City, Travellers' Insurance Co. v., 88 Mayor of Keokuk, Ten Eyck v., 38 Mayor, etc., of Little Rock v. State Bank, 14 Mayor of Perry v. Norwood, 22 Mayor, etc., of Town of Senoia, McKnight v., 22 Mayor, etc., of Wetumpka v. We- tumpka Wharf Co., 14 McBride, State ex rel. Henderson v., 65 McClintock, Board of Commis- sioners of Delaware County v., 35 McClure v. Owen, 40 McClure v. Township of Oxford, 44 McConnell v. Hamm, 43 McCoy v. Briant, 16 . McCurdy v. Shiawassee County, 51 McFarlin, County of Hardin v., 27 McHugh v. City and County of San Francisco, 17 McKenna, City of Covington v., 45 McKnight v. Mayor, etc., of Town of Senoia, 22 McLaurin v. Tatum, 86 McMillan v. Boyles, 38 McMullen v. Ingham, 49 McNab, City of Eufaula v., 13 McVichie v. Town of Knight, 97 Meadville, Hamlin v., 63 Meath v. Phillips County, 14 Meek v. Bayard, 83 Mellon v. Town of Lansing, 71 Mercer County, Frick v., 83 Merchants' Bank v. County of Bergen, 66 Merrell v. Town of Monticello, 35 Middleton v. City of St. Augustine, 20 Milan, Kelly v., 89 Miller v. Goodwin, 23 Miller v. Hixon, 81 Millsaps v. City of Terrell, 93 Mimnaugh, Eaton v., 82 Missouri River, etc. v. County of Miami, 43 Mitchell County v. City National Bank, 92 Mitchell County, Noel Young Bond & Stock Co. v., 92 Mittagg v. Mayor, etc., of Borough of Park Ridge, 66 Moberly, Jarrolt v., 58 Montgomery, Chisholm v., 13 Montpelier Savings Bank & Trust Co. v. School District No. 5 of the Town of Ludington, 97 Moore v. City of Duluth, 51 Moore County, Graves v., 76 Moore, State ex rel. School Dis- trict v., 65 Morgan County v. Thomas, 29 Morton v. Carlin, 62 Morton v. City of Nevada, 59 Mosher v. Independent School Dis- trict, 36 Mt. Pleasant, Foote v., 38 Mueller, Hauswirth v., 60 Mulligan v. Smith, 18 Murphy v. San Luis Obispo, 17 Muskingum County Commissioners v. State, 82 INDEX 115 Myers v. City of Jeffersonville, 35 Myers v. County of Johnson, 37 N Nalle v. City of Austin, 90 National Bank v. City of Iola, 43 National Bank, Duekett v., 48 National Bank of Commerce v. Town of Granada, 19 Neacy v, City of Milwaukee, 97 Neale v. County Court, 94 Neely, Whitesides v., 85 Nelson, Altaffer v., 80 Nesbit v. Riverside Independent • District, 39 Newburgh Savings Bank v. Town of Woodbury, 75 Newman, Jenkins v., 60 New York & Canada R. Co., Town of Wellsborough v., 75 Noel Young Bond & Stock Co. v. Mitchell County, 92 Nolan County, Quaker City Na- tional Bank v., 92 Nolan County v. State, 92 Northern Bank of Toledo v. Porter Township, 82 Northern Trust Co. v.' Village of Wilmette, 34 Norton v. Brownsville, 87 , Norton v. Dyersburg, 88 Norton v. Shelby County, 90 Norwood, Mayor, etc. of, Perry v., 22 O O'Brien e. Wheelock, 32 Oelrich v. Pittsburgh, 84 Ogden v. County of Daviess, 57 Ohio Valley Iron Works v. Town of Moundsville, 96 Okolona, Barnum v., 54 Okolona, Woodruff v., 54 Oliver v. City of Elberton, 21 Onstott v. People, 31 Ontario, Smith v., 72 Orient Fire Insurance Co., Ander- son v., 38 Osawkee Township, State ex rel, Griffiths v., 44 Oswego County Savings Bank v. Town of Genoa, 69 Ottawa, Amoskeag Bank v., 30 Ottawa v. Carey, 30 Ottawa v. First National Bank of Portsmouth, 30 Ottawa, Hackett v., 30 Oubre v. Town of Donaldsonville, 47 Owen .McClure v., 40 Oxford, Crow v , 44 Painter v. City of Norfolk, 62 Palmer v. City of Helena, 60 Paola & Fall River Ry. Co. v. Com- missioners of Anderson County, 41 Parish of Iberville, Breaux v., 47 Parish of Iberville, Marionneux v., 47 Parish of Red River, Lisso v., 47 Parker v. Smith, 27 Parkersburgh v. Brown, 96 Paul v. City of Kenosha, 96 Paxton, Board of Commissioners of Madison County v., 54 Payne, Commissioners of Bun- combe County v., 76 Peck v. City of Hempstead, 91 Peck, People ex rel. Hoag v., 67 People ex rel. Angel v. Hatch, 67 People ex rel. Averill v. Adirondack Co., 72 People ex rel. Bay City v. State Treas., 49 People ex rel. Cairo & St. Louis Ry. Co. v. Dupuyt, 29 People ex rel. Cairo & St. Louis R. Co. v. Jackson County, 27 116 INDEX People ex rel. D. W. & P. R. Co. v. Batchellor, 74 People ex rel. Delafield v. Hughitt, 71 People ex rel. Freeman v. Hurlburt, 73 People ex rel. Gillies v. Suffern, 70 People ex rel. Hains v. Smith, 72, 73 People ex rel. Hoag v. Peck, 67 People ex rel. Irwin v. Sawyer, 72 People ex rel. Jones, Eicheson v., 26 People ex rel. Kern County v. Baker, 15 People ex rel. Mahoney v. School District, 28 People ex rel. Moller v. Marsh, 74 People ex rel. Nelson v. Marsh, 74 People ex rel. Nolan, Eddy v., 32 People ex rel. Rock Island & Alton R. R., Board of Supervisors of Schuyler County v., 32 People ex rel. Rogers v. Spencer, 70 People ex rel. Sutton t>. Franklin, 73 People ex rel. Town of Rochester v. Deyoe, 73 People ex rel. Wilson v. Williams, 33 People ex rel. Yawger v. Allen, 74 People v. Common Council of Detroit, 50 People v. County of Tazewell, 33 People v Dutcher, 23 People, Madison County v., 29 People, Onstott v., 31 People, St. Louis, A. & T. H. R. Co. v., 24 People, Thatcher v., 26 People v. Township Board of Salem, 51 People v. Town of Bishop, 24 People's Bank of St. Paul v. School District, 79 Pepper v. City of Philadelphia, 84 Perkins v. Town of South Ottawa, 32 Perrin, Floyd v., 85 Perrin v. City of New London, 98 Perris Irrigation District, Leeman v., 15 Perry County, Bolles v., 31 Perry County, Citizens' S. & L. A. v., 31 Perry County, Stebbins v., 31 Petit, Sutro v., 17 Phillips County, Meath v., 14 Pima County, Lewis v., 14 Pittsburgh, Oelrich v., 84 Pittsburgh & Erie R. R., County of Crawford v., 83 Plainview Railroad Company, Har- rington v., 52 Plainview, Winona & St. Peter Railroad v., 52 Platte County, Deland v., 59 Police Jury v. Britton, 48 Police Jury of Parish of St. Bernard, Favalora v., 47 Polly v. Hopkins, 91 Pope, Village of East Moline v., 26 Porter Township, Northern Bank of Toledo v., 82 Portsmouth Savings Bank, Town of Concord v., 25 Portsmouth Savings Bank v. Village of Ashley, 48 Post v. Pulaski County, 31 Post, Supervisors of Kendall County v., 28 Post, Welch v., 26 Postel, Board of Trustees of Fords- ville v., 45 Potter v. Town of Greenwich, 70 Prickett v. City of Marceline, 58 Pulaski County, Post v., 31 Purcell v. City of East Grand Forks, 52 Purdy v. Lansing, 71 Q Quaker City National Bank v. Nolan County, 92 R Railroad Co. v. Falconer, 68 Rainsburgh Borough v. Fyan, 85 INDEX 117 Reed v. City of Cedar Rapids, 37 Reineman v. Covington, C. & B. R. -Co., 65 Rhodes, Sutro v., 15 Rich v. Town of Mentz, 71 Richardi v. Village of Bellaire, 49 Richards, Coffin v., 22 Richeson v. People ex rel. Jones, 26 Richland County, Gaddis v., 31 Riverside Independent District, Nesbit v., 39 Roanoke County, Bonsack & Kiser v., 94 Roberts v. Taft, 80 Robertson v. Breedlove, 93 Robertson v. City of Staunton, 94 Robinson v. City of Goldsboro, 76 Robinson, Concord v., 25 Rockford Village, Smith v., 82 Roddey, Johnson v., 86 Roggen, State ex rel. Gardner v., 61 Ross v. Lipscombe, 86 Ross, State ex rel. Atkinson v., 95 Ruohs v. Town of Athens, 87 Rural Independent District of Alli- son, Salmon v., 36 Rural Independent School District, Fairfield v., 19 Ryan v. Lynch, 30 S Sage v. Fargo Township, 42 St. Croix Co., Kyes v., 51 St. Joseph Board of Public Schools, Erwin v., 59 St. Lawrence Township v. Furman, 87 St. Louis, A. & T. H. R. Co. v. People, 24 Saline County Court, State v., 59 Salmon v. Rural Independent School District of Allison, 36 Santa Cruz Water Co. v. Kron, 18 Sauer v. Town of Gillett, 19 Savings & Trust Co., Alessandro Irrigation District v., 80 Sawyer, People ex rel. Irwin v., 72 Schaeffer v. Bowman, 28 Schall v. Bowman, 26 School District, Clegg v., 64 School District Directors, People ex rel. Mahoney v., 28 School District, Livingston v., 87 School District No. 3, Thornburgh v., 56 School District No. 5 of the Town of Ludington, Montpelier Sav- ings Bank & Trust Co. v., 97 School District No. 7 of Valley County, Ashuelot National Bank of Keene v., 65 School District No. 9 of Nuckolls County, State ex rel. Phillips v., 44 School District No. 50 of Barnes County, State v., 79 School District No. 52 v. People's Bank of St. Paul, 79 School District No. 70 of Barnes County, Flagg v., 78 School District of Lincoln, Fuller- ton v., 62 School District, State ex rel. Otto v., 64 School District v. Geer, 20 School District v. Stone, 40 Schultze v. Township Committee of Manchester Township, 66 Scott, City of Graymount v., 13 Scott v. Twombly, 71 Scott's Exrs. v. City of Shreveport, 47 Selectmen of Lunenburg, Essex County R. Co. v., 94 Seymour, Village of Hempstead v., 70 Shapter v. City and County of San Francisco, 17 Shaw v. Independent School Dis- trict, 39 Shawnee County v. Carter, 44 Shearer v. Board of Supervisors of Bay County, 49 Shelby County, Norton v., 90 118 INDEX Sherlock v. Village of Winetka, 34 Sherrard v. Lafayette County, 57 Sherrill, Village of Grant v., 62 Shiawassee County, McCurdy v., 51 Shortell, Green County »., 45 Shortridge, State ex rel. Aull v., 58 Siedler v. Chosen Freeholders of Hudson, 66 Silliman, Marshall v., 24 Silliman, Wiley v., 26 Sinton, Board of Education v., 82 Skinner v. City of Santa Rosa, 18 Skinner, Township of East Oak- land v., 18 Smith, Cain v., 21 Smith, Carroll County v., 53 Smith, Central Branch U. P. R. Co. v., 41 Smith, City of Madison v., 35 Smith v. City of Vicksburgh, 55 Smith v. Henry County, 37 Smith v. Mayor of Dublin, 21 Smith, Mulligan v., 16 Smith v. Ontario, 72 Smith, People ex rel. Haines v., 72, 73 Smith v. Rockford Village, 82 Snuggs, Commissioners of Stanley County v., 78 Snyder v. Baud Independent School District, 90 Spencer, People ex rel. Rogers v., 70 Spitzer v. Village of Blanchard, 49 Spring, Bait. & E. S. R. Co. v., 48 Spring Valley Township, Bissell v., 45 Springfield & Illinois S. Ry. Co. v. Supervisors, 25 Springport, Avery v., 74 Spurck v. Lincoln & N. W. R. Co., 61 Stanley County v. Coler, 77 Starin v. Town of Genoa, 69 State Bank, Mayor, etc., of Little Rock v., 14 State v. Board of Education of Cranbury Township, 66 State v . City of Bayonne, 65 State v. Saline County Court, 59 State v. County of Wapello, 40 State v. School District No. 50 of Barnes County, 79 State ex rel. Ainsworth Precinct v. Weston, 60 State ex rel. Atkinson v. Ross, 95 State ex rel. Aull v. Shortridge, 58 State ex rel. Barnes v. City of Blaine, 95 State ex rel. Board of Education o. Benton, 63 State ex rel. Bowen o. Adams County, 60 State ex rel. City of Beatrice v. Benton, 60 State ex rel. City of Bethany v. Allen, 55 State ex rel. City of Centralia v. Wilder, 56 State ex rel. City of Chillicothe v. Wilder, 56 State ex rel. City of Columbia v. Wilder, 57 State ex rel. City of Fremont v. Babcock, 61 State ex rel. City of Lincoln v. Babcock, 62 State ex rel. City of Wiant v. Bab- cock, 61 State ex rel. City of York v. Bab- cock, 65 State ex rel. Davis o. Board of Com- missioners of Newton County, 36 State ex rel. Gardner v. Roggen, 61 State ex rel. Grady v. Commissioners of Lincoln County, 62 State ex rel. Griffith v. Osawkee Township, 44 State ex rel. Henderson Banking Company v. McBride, 65 State ex rel. Miller v. City of Kan- sas City, 43 State ex rel. Otoe County v. Bab- cock, 63 State ex rel. Otto v. School Dis- trict, 64 INDEX 119 State ex rel. Phillips v. School Dis- trict No.. 9, Nuckolls County, 44 State ex rel. Potter v. King County, 95 State ex rel. School District v. Moore, 65 State ex rel. Short v. Board of Com- missioners of Sherman County, 65 State ex rel. Treadwell v. Commis- sioners of Hancock County, 81 State ex rel. Vandiver v. Tolly, 85 State ex rel. Watkins v. Macon County, 58 State ex rel. Willis v. Heber City, 93 State, Muskingum County Com- missioners v., 82 State, Nolan County v., 92 State Treasurer, People ex rel. Bay City v., 49 Stebbins v. Perry County, 31 Steele, Territory ex rel. Higgins v., 79 Stern v. City of Fargo, 79 Stewart v. Town of Lansing, 71 Stokes v, County of Scott, 40 Stone, School District v., 40 Strang v. Cook, 71 Suffern, People ex rel. Gillies v., 70 Supervisors, Wells v., 55 Supervisors, etc., of Cold Spring Township, Springfield & Illinois S. Ry. Co. v., 25 Supervisors of Kendall County v. Post, 28 Sutliff v. Lake County Commis- sioners, 19 Sutro v. Petit, 17 Sutro v. Rhodes, 15 Swan v. City of Arkansas, 14 Swanson v. City of Ottumwa, 39 Sweet v. Hulbert, 73 Sykes v. Mayor, etc., of Columbus, 54 Taft, Roberts v., 80 Tatum, McLaurin v., 86 Taxpayers of Milan v. Tennessee Central R. Co., 89 Ten Eyck v. Mayor of Keokuk, 38 Tennessee Central R. Co., Tax- payers of Milan v., 89 Territory ex rel. Higgins v. Steele, 79 Teutonia Savings Bank, Town of Springport v., 74 Thatcher v. People, 25 Thomas v. City of. Port Huron, 50 Thomas, Morgan County v., 29 Thomas v. Town of Lansing, 71 Thomasville Electric Light & Gas Co., City of Thomasville v., 22 Thompson v. Town of Mamakating, 71 Thompson v. Village of Mecosta, 50 Thornburgh v. School District No. 3, 56 Thruelsen v. Mayor of Duluth, 51 Tolly, State ex rel. Vandiver v., 85 Topeka, Loan Association v., 45 Town of Andes, Craig v., 67 Town of Athens, Ruohs v., 87 Town of Batavia, Force v., 23 Town of Big Grove v. Wells, 23 Town of Bishop, People v., 24 Town of Caneadea, Cowdrey v., 68 Town of Caneadea, Wilson v., 68 Town of Cicero, U. S. ex rel. Spit- zer v., 34 Town of Clarksdale v. Broaddus, 53 Town of Concord v. Portsmouth Savings Bank, 25 Town of Covington, Hopper v., 35 Town of Donaldsonville, Oubre v., 47 Town of Eagle v. Kohn, 25 Town of Eutaw, Coleman v., 13 Town of Genoa, Oswego County Savings Bank v., 69 Town of Genoa, Starin v., 69 Town of Gillett, Sauer v., 19 Town of Gilman, Femald v., 37 Town of Gorham, In re, 69 Town of Granada, National Bank of Commerce v., 19 Town of Greenwich, Potter v., 70 120 INDEX Town of Hancock, Cagwin v., 70 Town of Hebron, Brooklyn Trust Co. v., 20 Town of Hume, Angel v., 70 Town of Knight, McVichie v., 97 Town of Lacon, Barnes v., 28 Town of La Moille, Wade v., 28 Town of Lansing, Lytle v., 71 Town of Lansing, Mellen v., 71 Town of Lansing, Stewart v., 71 Town of Lansing, Thomas v., 71 Town of Lima, Veeder v., 97 Town of Mamakating, Thompson v., 71 Town of Mentz, Cook v., 71 Town of Mentz, Rich v., 71 Town of Middleport v. jEtna Life Insurance Co., 29 Town of Monticello, Merrill v., 35 Town of Moundsville, Ohio Valley I. W. Co. v., 95 Town of Northampton, Clarke v., 72 Town of Pana, Lippincott v., 30 Town of Parkland v. Gains, 46 Town of Plainview, Harrington v., 52 Town of Roberts, Williams v., 32 Town of Rochester v. Alfred Bank, 96, 98 Town of Rocksbury, Corbet v., 52 Town of Rosedale, Clark v., 55 Town of South Ottawa v. Perkins, 32 Town of Springport v. Franklin Savings Bank, 74 Town of Springport v. German Up- town Savings Bank, 74 Town of Springport v. Teutonia Savings Bank, 74 Town of Sterling, Gould v., 74 Town of Stites v. Wiggins Ferry Co., 33 Town of Thompson, Horton v., 75 Town of Venice v. Breed, 75 Town of Washington, Mayo v., 78 Town of Waterloo, Berliner v., 98 Town of Wellsborough v. N. Y. & C. R. Co., 75 Town of Williamston, Ellison v., 78 Town of Winamac v. Huddleston, 36 Town of Woodbury, Newburgh Sav- ings Bank v., 75 Township Board of Salem, People »., 51 Township Committee of Man- chester Township, Schultze v., 66 Township of East Oakland v. Skinner, 26 Township of Lamotte, Bogart v., 50 Township of Oxford, George v., 44 Township of Oxford, McClure v., 44 Travellers' Insurance Co. v. Mayor, etc., of Johnson City, 88 Tukey v. City of Omaha, 63 Turner v. Board of Commissioners of Woodson County, 42 Twombly, Scott v., 71 Tyler, Martin v., 79 U Uncas National Bank v. City of Superior, 98 Union Bank, Board of Commis- sioners v., 77 Union Bank v. Commissioners of the Town of Oxford, 77 Union Savings Association, Wilson v., 44 United States ex rel. Spitzer v. Town of Cicero, 34 United States Trust Co. v. Village of Mineral Ridge, 81 Urbana, Leslie v., 33 Van Buren, Dodge »., 50 Van Keuren, Hardenbergh v., 73 Van Orman, Wilkinson v., 36 Veeder v. Town of Lima, 97 Village of Ashley, Portsmouth Sav- ings Bank v., 48 Village of Bellaire, Richardi v., 49 Village of Blanchard, Spitzer v., 49 INDEX 121 Village of Broekport v. Green, 68 Village of Canandaigua v. Hayes, 68 Village of Detroit, Hamilton v., 51 Village of Douglas, Weismer v., 68 Village of East Moline v. Pope, 26 Village of Fort Edward, Culver v., 69 Village of Fort Edward v. Fish, 69 Village of Grant v. Sherrill, 62 Village of Hempstead v. Seymour, 70 Village of Mecosta, Thompson »., 50 Village of Mineral Bridge, U. S. Trust Co. v., 81 Village of Oquawka, Coquard v., 30 Village of Oquawka v. Graves, 30 Village of Rienzi, Green v., 55 Village of Suspension Bridge, Ger- mania Savings Bank v., 75 Village of Wilmette, Northern Trust Co. v., 34 Village of Winnetka, Sherlock v., 34 W Wade, Illinois Grand Trunk Rail- way Company v., 28 Wade v. Town of La Moille, 28 Wade v. Walnut, 28 Walnut, Wade v., 28 Webb v. City Council of Alexandria, 94 Webb v. Lafayette County, 59 Webb & Co., Commissioners of Town of Henderson v., 76 Webb & Co., Highway Commis- sioners of Valleytown Township v., 78 Weismer v. Village of Douglas, 68 Wcith & Arents v. City of Wilming- ton, 78 Welch v. Post, 26 Wells, Earles v., 96 Wells v Supervisors, 55 Wells, Town of Big Grove v., 23 West, City of Aurora v., 34 Weston, State ex rel. Ainsworth Precinct v., 60 Wetumpka Wharf Co., Mayor, etc., of Wetumpka v., 14 Wheeler v. City of Plattsmouth, 63 Wheelock, O'Brien v., 32 Whelan's Appeal, 84 White River Savings Bank v. City of Superior, 98 Whitesides v. Neeley, 85 Whitford v. Clark County, 56 Whitney v. Kentucky Midland Ry. Co., 46 Wichman v. City of Placerville, 16 Wiggins Ferry Co., Town of Stites v., 33 Wilbur v. Wyatt, 63 Wilder, State ex rel. City of Cen- tralia v., 56 Wilder, State ex rel. City of Chilli- cothe v., 56 Wilder, State ex rel. City of Co- lumbia »., 57 Wiley v. Silliman, 26 Wilkins v. City of Waynesboro, 22 Wilkinson v. Van Orman, 36 Williams v. People ex rel. Wilson, 33 Williams v. People, 32 Williams v. Town of Roberts, 32 Williamson v. Aldrich, 86 Williamson v. City of Keokuk, 38 Wilmington Savings Bank v. City of Superior, 98 Wilson, City of Leavenworth t>., 43 Wilson v. City of Shreveport, 48 Wilson v. Town of Caneadea, 68 Wilson ». Union Savings Associa- tion, 44 Winona & St. Peter Railroad v. Elgin, 52 Winona & St. Peter Railroad v. Plainview, 52 Winters, Bates v., 55 Wittowsky v. Board of Commis- sioners of Jackson County, 76 Witter v. Board of Supervisors of Polk County, 76 122 INDEX Wood, Louisiana v., 57 Woodbury County, Casady v., 40 Woodruff v. Okolona, 54 Woodward v. City of Grangeville, 23 Woonsocket Institution for Sav- ings, City of Columbus v., 91 Wright v. East Riverside Irrigation District, 15 WuIIenwaher v. Dumugan, 64 Wyatt, Wilbur v., 63 Yawger, People ex rel., Allen v., 74 Young v. Clarendon, 49 Youngstown Bridge Co., Brazoria County v., 90 DEAN'S DIGEST OF CORPORATION CASES By MAURICE B. DEAN OF THE NEW YORK BAR Used by some of the leading law schools CONTAINS A synopsis of the Facts, Arguments of Counsel, De- cision and Important Extracts of Opinions of 184 impor- tant corporation cases. It deals fully with the points of each case relating to corporation law and omits the rest. The object of the book is' to enable one to deduce the principles of corporation law from the facts of actual de- cisions without useless effort; and to fix those principles in his memory by reference to specific cases. A special feature of the book is that it is printed on one side of the page, leaving the right hand page blank for notes. Price $5.00 net, Buckram THE BANKS LAW PUBLISHING CO. 23 Park Place New York I llii II