The daily Gate City. [volume] (Keokuk, Iowa) 1855-1916, 1861-04-12
Ulsy 4onls Yea.

Ooyy 4On0e VOA&
We are indebted q : LEGAL fri4nd for the
following statement d fasts ana the lsx
theresa, = declared ~ Judge Love 81 IL
District Court Of tho United ssstss, In his
opinion delivered yesterday, il ths cass Of
BeseAes - the City Of Ksokuk. go 1900
In tbis ssse II was alleged that the plain.
iii bad notice Of the purpose for which the
bonds wefe issued. The action 81 Bsecbcr
" the City OF Keokuk, VAS broueht % four
bonds and number al coupons, made BY
tho City 10 1852 to John r. SANFORD, and
since negotiated 10 the plaintiff IL was an
swered By the City that some Of the bonds
were issued to aid 10 building Medical COL
lege and Hospital for the College OF Physi-
clans and Surgeons Of tbs Iowa University,
and the rest 70 obtain n appropriation from
Congress TO build certain Railroads il Iowa,
hAtNean DnhnQnA and kAoknk. and hetAeen
Davsnport and Counsil Bluls; Apd farther,
that By her charter shs City could not Dor.
row moro than 120, 900, snd had her bonds
then outstsndiog for that amount. To this
answer there Vas . demurrer. The Court
held that Corporation lad such powers -
we're expressly conferred By iss charter, and
such powers % we're occidental 20 these, and
none others. That the powers expressly
conferred were 70 be construed 10 view OF
tho general purpose for which the Corpora
tion was created; and whore, Tor instance,
che powerto borrow money VS. granted ia
the Charter Of City, II would be construed
80 be pa1ar Tor municipal pnrpoaGs. and
not power to borrow Tor any speculative
purpose. That any contract osds BY the
officers Of . City, in the name Of City, for
. purpose not expressly authorised, or for
soms purpose Incidental thereto. % muu'.
cipal purpose, vas nsdA without authority
Of Law and UOid. Thst tho o6eees Of Civ
were but the agents Of the City with de-
fined authority, and for special purposes, and
could no more bind the City By contracts
made beyond their sashority than special
agent could bis principal BY contract be.
yond bis limited authority. That IL wss tho
duty Of tho person dealing with special
agent TO learn the extent OF his aath0risy;
consequently II shs bonds susd on we're 10
fact issued without authority, they we're void
10 the hands OF innocent purchasers ~ we'll
a. 10 the hands Of the original psrsiss. That
the bonds given to build Medical College
and Hospital were for . nunieipal purpose,
% far - lesst - they were given 70 bnild .
Hospital, and the demurrer so this part Of
the Answer should be sustained. That the
bonds given 20 obtain IN appropriation from
Congress we're not authorised BY any grant
10 the Charter, nor any isoideusal power Of
the City. Thst they we're issued 30 advance
no purpose for which the City was created
and were void from the begiuaisg. That
the City was nos created to furnish means
TO lobby . scheme through Congress, and
any bends issued for such an end we're void
even in the hands OF the plaintiff.
That the demurrer to this part Of the an
sWer should be Ovsrfnled.
That the answer, that oil the bonds susd
on werefor borrowed money, and that 1t the
time they we're issued the city had already
exhausted her power 10 borros money, Vas
valid defenca, and the demurrer thereto
should be osefralsd.
The parties took leave to plead further,
and the case Vas sonsinued. Thsse points
viii be ultimately decided in the Supreme
Court OF the q. 8.
10 the Muscasine case the Court decided
thes the CITY had no right or power to issue
bonds to aid 10 the construction OF railroads,
Az that case 10 one Of more general char.
acter and the principles involved are Of more
universal interest, We wait an abstract Of the
written opinion Of tho Court. which will
probably be furnished to morrow.
". II. r. Guriey, the newly appointed Dis.
r.; A..asn.y 1ns Oh. Dissrct Of Ioss, Thea
presented bis commission and was duly sworn
into once.