Humboldt Township v. Long - 92 U.S. 642 (1875)


U.S. Supreme Court

Humboldt Township v. Long, 92 U.S. 642 (1875)

Humboldt Township v. Long

92 U.S. 642

Syllabus

1. The bonds in question in this suit were issued under the authority of the same act of the legislature as those mentioned in the preceding case. The doctrines there held are reaffirmed.

2. A bond of the tenor following,

"Be it known that Humboldt Township, in the County of Allen and State of Kansas, is indebted to the Fort Scott & Allen County Railroad Company, or bearer, in the sum of $1,000, lawful money of the United States, with interest at the rate of seven percent per annum, payable annually on the first days of January in each year, at the banking house of Gilman, Son & Co., in the City of New York, on the presentation and surrender of the respective interest coupons hereto annexed. The principal of this bond shall be due and payable on the thirty-first day of December, A.D. 1901, at the banking house of Gilman, Son & Co., in the City of New York. This bond is issued for the purpose of subscribing to the capital stock of the Fort Scott & Allen County Railroad, and for the construction of the same through said township, in pursuance of and in accordance with an act of the Legislature of the State of Kansas, entitled 'An Act to enable municipal townships to subscribe for stock in any railroad, and to provide for the payment of the same,' approved Feb. 25, A.D. 1870, and for the payment of said sum of money and accruing interest thereon, in manner aforesaid, upon the performance of the said condition, the faith of the aforesaid Humboldt Township, as also its property, revenue, and resources, is pledged."

"In testimony whereof, this bond has been signed by the chairman of the Board of County Commissioners of Allen County, Kan., and attested by the county clerk of said county, this twelfth day of October, 1871."

"Z. WISNER"

"Chairmen County Commissioners"

"Attest: W. E. WAGGONER, County Clerk"

is negotiable, and a bona fide holder is entitled to the rights of a holder of negotiable paper taken in the ordinary course of business before maturity.

3. Although the election authorizing the issue of the bonds was held within less

Page 92 U. S. 643

than thirty days after the day of the order calling it, they are not thereby rendered invalid in the hands of a bona fide holder for value, who, without any knowledge of the process through which the legislative authority was exercised, relied upon the recitals in them that they had been issued in accordance with law. The recitals are conclusive in a suit brought by him against the township.



Official Supreme Court caselaw is only found in the print version of the United States Reports. Justia caselaw is provided for general informational purposes only, and may not reflect current legal developments, verdicts or settlements. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or information linked to from this site. Please check official sources.