The Evansville daily journal. [volume] (Evansville, Ia. [i.e. Ind.]) 1848-1862, 1857-02-26
FOT the JOuFnaI.
Corporation and Railroads.

The following synopsis Of decision Of the
Supreme Court, of Ohio, at its present Febru-
ary term, in the case Of Moran Brothers vs.
the Commissioners and Auditor of Clinton
county, on an application for peremptory
mandarLus, will be OF interest to counties and
cities, who have issued their bonds to Rail-
road Companies. The agreement between the
Commissioners and the Railroad Company in
this case was, that the Railroad Company
(: should provide for the interest of the coupons;
as they became due. The Company trans
ferred the bonds and coupons to third party,
and neglected to pay the interest. The party
to whom they were transferred on default of
payment by the Company Of the interest, ap-
piled to the Court for peremptory mandamus
to compel the county to pay the coupons,
this the Court ordered, compelling the county,
on default of the Railroad Company's paying,
topay the interest.
Can there be a doubt that if the Board Of
County Commissioners oil a county, or the
corporation Of city, having power by law to
issue their bonds to q Railroad Company, and
make an order on their record to that effect,
there being no fraud in the case, that the
Court having jurisdiction of the subject matter
would issue peremptory mandamus to the
corporation making the order, compelling them
to issue the bonds, thus ordered on their
books to be issued for the stock subscribed?-
We think not, unless there was some fraud in
the transaction, on some condition precedent to
be performed, by the Railroad Company, made
rsrt of the contract agreed to by the Com
pany, and appearing of record. We do not
profess to be well yersed in the matter OF legal
proceedings, but in common sense view oil
the matter, we believe any Court having juris-
,iiction, would enforce the issuing of the bonds
by the city or county, under such clrcum-
stances. If the Court would enforce the pay
ment Of interest on bonds issued, where the
agreement was, that the Railroad Company,
and not the county should provide for its pay
ment, the same Court would enforce the issu-
ing of bonds agreed to be issued on subscrip-
ton Of stock, where there was no ,cratten st.pu-
lation between the city and the Railroad Com
pany, for some precedent act by the company,
before the issuing of the bonds, and made part
of the contract. We understand no such
written agreement or stipulation exists, as be-
tween the city and the Straight Line Railroad
"Moran Brothers vs.. The Commissioners
!. and Auditor Of Clinton county. Application
for peremptory mandamus.
j. R. Swan, j., delivered the opinion Of the
,Court. The Commissioners Of Clinton coun.
!, ty issued their negotiable bonds, with war.
rants for interest attached, under the act au.
thorizng the Commissioners of Clinton coun
ty to subscribe for the stock Of the Cincinnati
Wilmington s. GAINESVILLE Railroad COmpan!
passed March /, 1851.
Held: That the holders Of the bonds ISSUED
to, and negotiated by the railroad compan.
were entitled to the interest from the county
and that the county must look to the railroa
company to be reimbursed the amount pai
by the county. That it was the duty of tn
County Commissioners, in case the railroa
company did not provide for the payment {
the interest to assess tax sufficient to NEE
it, and IN default thereof, holder Of the h)pt
as relator, could enforce the duty Of the Cour
ty Commissioners by mandamus.,'
Peremptory mandamus ordered.