Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1874-03-25
Decision Of the Supreme
Court in the Rees Case.
The Court Will Not Order the Levy
ing of a Tax to Pay the Sd.
.aae. Judgment. sat
Limit to the Remedies Against a
Municipal Debtor. 4ra.

James H. Rees, Appellant, .. The City OF
Hatertopn. Appeal from the Circuit Court
ssfthe United States for the Western Dis
lrict of Wisconsin. H. VI. l. D K Tenney
az James II. Rees. D. Hall for the City
f WATERFOWL
Mr.. Justice HUNT delivered the opinion
af the court.
The plaintiff was the owner of certain
bends issued by the city of Watertown
20 the Watertown & Madison Railroad
Company, and ~ them sold for their
seneft. The plaintiff recovered three sew
s.veI judgments in the United States
Court on these bonds, amounting TO nearly
$4,000 Afterwards he brought another
salt in the United States Court for the Wes-
vern District of Wisconsin upon these sever
I'll Judgments, and, on the Sd of February.
487l, recovered iud gmcnt for SlI ,066.99
In the summer OF 1858 he issued execu-
lions upon the two judgm, nts first OBJ
aimed, which were returned wholly I'M
satisfied In November of the same year he
procured from the United States Circuit
Court reremptory writ of mandamus, d.
,secting he city of WATERFOWL to levy and
collect tax upon the taxable property of
LIE city, to pay the said judgments, but, as
the plaintiff alleges, before the writ could
ne served, majority of the members of
she city council resigned their Offices. This
TACT was re turned by the Marshal, aud pro-
cecdings upon the manGamus thereupon
ceased In May, 1869, another board of
aldermen having been elected, the plaintiff
5rocured another writ of mandamus to be
issued, which writ was served on all of the
aldermen except one Halliger, who was
sex at the time of the service upon the
others. No steps were taken to comply
with the Iequisilion of the writ. An order
ID show cause why the aldermen should
got be punished for contempt, in net COM
styling with its requirements, was obtained,
end before its return day SIX of the alder
men resigned their places leaving in Office
but enc more than a quorum, and of whom
he said Halliger, upon whom the writ had
rot been served, was one. Various pro-.
eeedings were had and various excuses
made, the whole resulting in an order that
he aldermen should at once levy and col.
secr the tax; but before the order could be
served on Halfiger he resigned his Office,
aud again the board was without quorum.
Nothing was accomplished by their effort n
aid Of the plaintiff, but fines were imposed
upon the recusaut aldermen, which WAS or
Is red to be applied in discharge OF the costs
of the proceedings. In October, 1870, the
:,iaintiff obtained third writ Of maadamus,
which resulted As the former ones had done,
and by the same means. on the part of tt e
aiicer ofthe city. A special election was
ordered to be held to fill the vacancies of the
liz hrf
cast, except three in one ward, and the
person for whom they were cast refused to
qualify. There is very limited denial in
she answer of some of these allegations, but
their general truth is not denied, 1t is
certain that 40 part Of the debt of the
plaintiff has ever been paid, and that, with
sn accumulation Of fourteen years interest
The same remains wholly due, and that the
plaintiffs efforts to obtain satisfaction of
his judgments have failed.
The bill sets forth certain acts of the
Legislature OF Visions in, which, it Is al
legged, were intended to aid the defendant
In svadlng the payment of his debts, and
which, it can scarcely be denied, have lad
that effect, whatever may have been the in.
tent of the legislature passing them
The plaintiff asks the aid Of the court to
subject the taxable property of the city te
the payment OF the judgments, alleging tina
tina corporate authorities and trustees fol
the benefit ofthe creditors Of the city. anc
the property Of the citizens trust fund fol
that purpose, and that it is the duty of the
court to lay hold of the property and cause
it to be justly applied. He asks specifcal y
thai a decree may be made, sutjecting the
taxable property of the citizens TO the pay
ment of his judgments, and that the Mar.
shall OF the District may be empowered te
seize and sell so much OF it as may be nee
essary, and pay over to him the proceeds O.
.sueh sale.
This case is free from the objections us
ually made to a recovery npon municipal
bonds. 1t is beyond doubt that the bond;
ssere issued by the authority of an act o.
The Legislature of the State of Wisconsin
and ic the manner prescribed by the stat.
ute 1t is DOT denied that the railroad, in
aid OF the construction OF which they were
issued, has been built, and was put in oper
ation .r
Upon class of the defenses interposeG
IN the answer and in the argument it is mo-
necessary TO spend much time Thus it il
alleged that the city Of WATERFOWL contains
aIopulation OF but7553 inhabitants; that the
vaine of its prop rty is assessed at but a little
over 81 900, 900; that the debt of the city
rs $750,oeo; that it is impossible for the
city 10 pay this debt; that it was expected
and provided that the railroad company
would pay the bouds in question, but the
roads have been foreclosed and sold that
tha city has compromised nd settled por-
tion of its Indebtedness hat it has levied
Gle taxes necessary TO effect such compro-
mise; and that it is ready TO compromise
ali outstanding bonds and judgments at a
high a rate as can be collected of the people
of Watertown that there is no law to
compel the retention OF the Office OF alder
men to levy taxes that the Plaintiff took
Ais chance of its being voluntarily done
ana nat no; being voluntarily done, there
Is no violation OF law.
These theories are vicious. They are
htased upon The idea that refusal TO pay
IA huneSt deb; is justi6able because il
would distTeS, he debtor to pay it. a vol
sns~rI sefus"t t" BOY az honest debt i. =
high ohense "a < cGmmerc!al communit =
and Is Just cause OF war between nations