The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-12-17
EXPORTS 10 DOMESTIC r"HFs.
FINANCIAL Ann sevvEuer.r Nrv=
MUNICIPAL RoNns MIar tn rain.

MUNICIPAL RaNn9 MFaT TIT rA1n
STATUTORY LIMITATIONS ~ Nan hFiar,F
Towns or RFsrnNsipttI ~ nv ROMA iIHE
HaLnFRs, \ eaae ot vast tmpol tanra fa air ita
United Ataten niatr n Count NV Ml Faranna far
plaintiff and 1nl, Gte'h fpr defendant. Tho
case was entitled crosby against the Gitv az
McGfpgnr and involved upward W. ssF aa0 II,
actual each besides rtinoinee nf enduring IN
tiuence upon the crnAur rf rity governments
The action rrraanted new uhaan ol the lnne
Irrigated municipal hNnd auaEJfan. Va tEan thp
city Of MeGr, gnf iaaued about fla.non II hanaa
fgr the nmrprao w halng aNli I'M the mRth y
which subsequently cana into the banda II
the plaintiff, without other nNtica ~ ~ the
PURPOSE ior which they. We're iaauei shan ihat
Imposed w the ordinance under which
they were iaaned, which vac annexed -
the honda AT the time Nc their negotiation
BY THE ordinance the epntHn rulrose for
which the money wna snuEh' III hn borrowed
does not appear. Il wa raposlcd w council
that the validity INF the hGnda wns ~ he pua
tainei II at all, under the general law N the
State for the iuearpprafiNn of cities ana towna.
BY section lila ~ tha raNiaton II IL nrnyiiri
that mnniotral CORPORATIONS may negotiate
loans III anticipation rf thnit revenues bWt the
aggregate Rhnll not eNoaad rnr 4 n @f the
value of The taxable prnunrty Within thnt lim
IT.. By. aection li2e + IL provided Tint 4 tx -
ment of such honda. IN thia oaaa It waa CON
eeded by hoFh that the honda IN aueatinn An
ceeded the statutory limit. aud that the plaintih
Rt the time af hia purchase had na notice NJ that
fact.
III was claimed unon the part NJ The plainliG
that under a decision et inc supreme count ~
the United Stataa the defendant could nnt avail
tteelf either az an eNoeaG IF the amount rra-
earibed hy the RtatWtn or amy Gthnr iafnnsa than
the want uf power IN The defend 4nt. uadar any
circumstances III far any pnrpnap, f. borrow
money: II It haa such rCwey tar ANY rurpoap
the plaintiff. q bona flde holder could taenvnr
The court held and directed iudsmnDt III
favor of TIE paintth which wRa. up0u apulioa
ton Of defpndanta counsel certified IN the iii
prema Court of the United Stataa We undats
stand that the precap aucRii0n Involved in thH
case has not heretofore bonn before that aauft
That ii MAY M cf very great Importance
Ia manifest AT glance 81 ttesn who
have studied The question. Judge MAJ
sou who paeEea mon the oaae. vory
decided IN his optpirn thHt honda nnen iasuni
and regularly In the handa " . bona DIDO hol I
er, whether they were Ia nNcaaE Nf the Nnr aeili
limit fixed hY the atatutn or not. ehoula 10 paia
but aa II involved question Nf ao much i'm
portanca he said he would certify the paRp III
the United Statea Snpreme Count II Judge Low
would divide" with him. MI. Farsona, III lila
argument, held mn the rnault of mn adverse IT,.
cision a. Reputation, ana made sel1a ytEaTou4
thrusta at that ktnd of fnanciarina. which thu
defendant found great trouhln ~ marry. Innda
Ing the reaching of the eaan In the Supreme
Court III waa agreed w counsel that lutgn
Love ahould Join In certifying Il 70 tho Su-
prene Court hY dividing lnaEmeut n againat
the city. and she must prepare e. pay her deb
--tDes Moines iowa Leader, November 4l