The weekly clarion., 1876-02-02
LEGAL INTELLIGENCE.
SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI.
Cases Decided Monday, Jan'y "a.
PREPARED FOR THE CLARION BIZ FRANK
JOHNSTON, ESQ.


Mayor and Aldermen OfVicExsburg
VS.. e. H. LOmbard-NO. 1852.
Mayor and Aldermen of vfcIxsburg
VS.. u. v. n. Gardmer-NO. 1865
Mayor and Aldermen of Viclzsburg
vs. n. MI. Lombard-NO. 1s69.
These cases involving the same legal
questions were considered and decided in
one opinion:
Opinion of the Court By SI1IRALL, j.
These cases involve the validity of the
improvement and railroad bond issued By
the city Of Vicksburg.
The subject embraces the following ques-
tions:
1st. When did the city charter, and sup
plement thereto, of July 1870, take effectF
al. Were the Mayor and Aldermen un-
der whose administration rhe bonds were
issued, officers de jure or de factOs
Sd. Did the city authorities transcend
their authority in making the bonds nego-
table?
4th. Were the bonds reglsted as required
by the charter?
9Th Did the requisite number of voters
assent to the Issuance of$100,0 900 90 OF bonds
to the Vicksburg & Memphis r. II. Co., and
like amount to the Pensacola & Ship Is
land Il. r. CO., in payment OF subscription
for stock?
W u.
Legislature % revise the charter and extend
the limits of Vicksburg. It extends the
boundaries of the city, and provides for
city government. the language being, "be
and they are hereby constituted body poll
itic by the name =. of the Mayor aud AL
dermen." The 4th section provides for
city election in August after the first State
election, with power in the Mayor and AL
dermen to enlarge the time OF voting The
5th section directs the Mayor and Aldermen
to provide all suitable arrangements for
holding the election. By the 3Sth section
the Mayor and Aldermen constituted by the
act, shall be the successors OF the Mayor
and city council.
The Mayor and Board of Alderman, in
office by appointment under the act of lS7d
were recognized by subsequent legislation
as properly In office, and were in fact DIS
charging all their functions without dis
sent or objection from the citizens of Vicks-
burg.
On July 10th, 1870, the supplemental act
was passed, the 9th section OF which author
Orized the issuance of bonds not exceeding
$500,U0O, for the improvement of the city
and for funding outstanding city scrip.
Tie act of February 10th, 1871, treats the
original and supplementary acts as having
gone into immediate effect, the 2nd section
providing for the issuance OF bonds in excess
1871. by the Mayor and Aldermen.
By these acts, the bonds SO issued were to
be used for the improvement OF the city,
and for funding city scrip; all bontlS " is
sued'' were to be registered in the Treasu-
rer's book, and no bond was valid u"iesS s.
registered.
The bonds might be issued for work done
at par, and when disposed of for any otht r
purpose, to be valued in the transfer at not
less than per cent. below par.
Section l, of act of Feb. 10, 1870, provides
that In negotiating THESE bonds, they were
to be valued at not less than so cents on the
dollar.
Under the act of April .. 1872, the city
loaned to the Vicksbnrg & Memphis Rail-
road Company 100000 of these bonds, in
aid of its construction.
Under the Goth section of the charter of
the Pensacola and Ship Island Railroad the
city became subscriber to its stock, paying
therefor SlG0, 900 of These bonds.
These bonds are not expressly made nego-
table. The interest was, by the conditions
OF the bonds, payable in New York.
Iu registering these bonds, the entry
showed to whom "sold," instead of stating
to whom 50 issued"
The records of the Mayor and Aldermen
showed that the Board canvassed the cleo
ton returns, and declared that the requisite
number of electors had voted, and that the
result was in favor of the subscription. The
objections to the validity of the bonds have
been already stated in the form OF legal
questions. Held:
1. The charter and supplement thereto,
of July Goth, 1870, took effect and went into
operation at the date of its passage.
Ii. The Mayor and Board of Aldermen
under whose administration these bonds
were issued, were exercising all the duties
and functions of their offices under claim
of title, and without dissent from the citi-
Zens of Vicksburg. and were in every sense
de fdct0 officers. The validity of their ii tie
to the offices, in view of the mode of their
appointments. cannot be inquired into in
| this case, to effect the rights of remote bona
fde holders of these bonds.
-fpt1o Of kIn -kak.n nEo1
authorizing the issuance of the bonds, to
the law, it was necessary to make the bonds
negotiable, N and the bonds on this objection
are not invalid.
~, The bonds were properly registered
as 'tsOld," instead of as Issued" as it is
urged they should have been by the PLAIN
| tiffs in Error. The terms ISSUED" and ''sold''
mean substantially the same thing.
| v. As the proceedings of the Mayor and
! Aldermen showed that the election was de-
clared by them as valid and legal, and in
| favor OF the Issuance of the bonds TO the
| Railroads, a remote holder of the bonds for
value cannot be affected by irregularities in
| the election, or a failure of the requisite
two-thirds majority to vote in favor of sub
scription. This question canuOt now be con-
| sidered. At any time before the issuance OF
the bonds this question could have been rails
| ed by any Taxpayer. but after the bonds
have passed Into the hands of purchasers for
value, 1t is then too late to make the obiec-
| ton. (HawkinS VS., Board of Supervisors,
90 Miss. judgment G.frqsed.