The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1872-01-31


G57l; do. new, 65ls e54 Virginia, ex coupon. 81
5ex; do. registered stock, cld A 5o do sxes con-
solidated bonds "a $40; do. SKIES, deferred scrip.
10 II: Georgia SKIES rs O 49, do. sevens, SIS 80;
North Carolina, ex COUPON 80 "a; do. funding,
1866 22 "a do. funding. 1868. 20 Il; do. new 15,s
IT; do, special tax. l2s Is; Missouri skies. 93H
%; do. Hannibal ana st. Joseph. 92% a 92k;
Louisiana skies. So co. do new. 50 a SIS; do. levee
skies, 81 65; do. levee eighIs, 70 80; do. levee
Fights. 1875, so So; do Penentiary severs s. 10;
do. railroad Fights, 20 so; Alabama 1yes go Ca do
Fights, 80 q %; do. ei.nts, Montgomery and Euraua
Railroad. 81 90; South Carolina SKIES so IS; do.
new, January aud July. 2sal 80; do do. April and
October. % q 3d. Arkansas skies. funded, 81 q 90;
do sevens, Little Rock and Fort Smith issue 10
rs.
THE EXPORTS OF THE WEEK
The aggregate amount OF exports, exclusive OF
specie, from the port OF New York for the week
ending January 80, 1872, was s4.50O,o6S.
VALIDITY OF TOWN BONDS DECIDED.
The United States Court at Springfield, ILL.,, Judge
Drummond presiding, has rendered the following
decision IN the suits brought compel the town OF
Bloomington to recognize the bonds issued by it in
aid OF the Lafayette Railroad, the case being i'm.
portant as precedent for similar litigation through.
out the country
When, under certain circumstances, tt Is con-
Ceded, as Is the case here, tnat a corporation or
when these bonds or coupons attached are IN the
HANDS OF innocent persons who nave paid value tor
them, the question Is, whether IL Is competent for
the municipality TO set up tnat those conditions
have not been computed with In most OF these
cases 1t IS ecared That, IN order 10 enforce the
issuing or these bonds, there must he an ap-
plicaton made 10 the municipality by the
voters, and 1t Is only when that 10 done that the
municipality had right TO issue the bonds. When
sucn application IS made the proper number OF
voters IL precedent TO the issuing Of the bonds.
The power to determine whether the application
NUMBER OF voters rests with the municipality or
us agents. enc when tney have acted, although
1t Is condition precedent to the issuing of
the bonds, the municipality cannot say that
1t has acted without NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. this par.
Llcular condition having been complied with. This
rule runs through all authorities. Now, as we I'M
derstand, the opecuon is made mere that one OF the
conditions upon which these bonds were to issue
was, that they should not be issued except upon
certain amount OF work Del ~ done upon the road.
are peculiarly within the cognizance OF the
parties, that other persons-inL ocent purchasers
are not bound TO inquire INTO tue existence of those
facts. How IL 1t hereY Now, whether or not the
application was made by the proper number
OF voters - mater OF public no.orety. and
Is not necessary for bona Ide purchaser OF bond
or coupon TO inquire into that ana 80 ben,nd the
bond TO ascertain whether this condition has been
compiled with not Why should there be in such
case as TINS any greater necessity Tor inquring
TO now much work mas been done Must the pur-
chaser 60 upon the road aud ascertain whether the
ties have been iad down ana the road put In run
ming order, when the law declares that the boz DIS
shall not he issued except those facts exist
| when the bonds nave been issued by the agents
OF the MUNICIPALITY Why Is q party any more
obliged III that case than In the other ascertain
the lacts? Although tner case shows that the busi-
ness was somewhat loosely done, and that certain
! facts were not spread upon the record as they
should have been, yet that fact wOnld not make 1t
necessary to 30 amt ascertain whether every contln
gency mad occurred precedent to the issuing OF the
bonds 1he law presumes That the agents OF public
corporation VIII act IN conformity with the law,
! and the corporation must endorse the acts OF ITS
| agent. These agents nave done what the law au-
thUrlzed to be done ana issued the ponds. The
| bonds bear on their lace the TACT that they were
Issued In conformity with the law, anu when an IN.
! nocent purchaser looks upon them In the market
and buys them with TINS evidence OF Legality upon
| their lace 1t IS not competent for the NUM-
| cpality TO turn around anu say tnat Its agents
ola not act as they ought TO nave done that they
did not comply with certain conditions with which
they were required to comply. This Is a rule OF uni
versal application which has been repeatedly settled
by the decisions OF the Supreme Court OF the United
series OF years. 1t would be reversing all tine rules
that have existed long time to say that It Is COM
petent now FOR the town OF Bloomington TO
! come IN and say that 'Our agents have issued
/ these bonds before they were authorized to issue
them" When the bonds were issued the town OF
Bloomington TOOK the responsibility OF the acts OF
Its agents. and outside parties dealing with ponds
| In the market were not obliged to look into rne
hidden Things which were done or not done by tue
agents oi the municipality
IL Is Tor these reasons, as we understand them
| these cases. Let judgment enter for The coupons
with interest Oh them since their maturity April l.
| 1871.