Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1884-09-10
TIE Important Decision 0fe OuT
nl[1,Ofk0 DEBT.

iHS uuueISlgDeu attorneys OF the Guy III
its railroad bond litigation, have the
honor to respectfully report to your hon.
orable body that on the 18th and 10Th of
July last, they tried in the United States
Circuit Court for the Western District of
Wisconsin, the five suits, to-wit: of
Henry Amy ct al, the two cases of Ru-
tus Spaulding ct al. and the two cases of
Edwin f. Knowlton ct al. against the
City, on the demurrers interposed by the
bondholders to our answers, in which we
set up the statute of limitations of 1872
in bar of the suits. On the Goth of
August last, the court decided all these
five actions in favor of the city. In
order to show how completely the deci-
sions cover every question of law made or
that can be made as to all the bonds and
coupons not in judgment, we annex a
copy of the opinion OF the court, filed in
The Amy case, but equally applicable
and applied to all the five cases.
The rule laid down by the court will,
we think, bar and defeat all actions on a
million dollars or more of the city's rail
road debt including all bonds and cou>
pons not in judgment, or about three
tourths of the whole city debt To the
balance, about one-fourth of our city
debt in judgment, we have interposed a
like defense under an other statute in
| the suit of Metcalf VS.. the City, on one
of the judgments against The city, which
we expect to try about the first of Nov,
! next, in the same court.
The final clause in the opinion and
decision of the Court permitting Plain
| tried like these on demurrer. But we
think there will not be an amendment,
as we cannot see that any can be made
that will help them.
All of which is respectfully submitted,
GEO. w. BIRD,
DANIEL HALL.
Dated September 9Th, 1884.
Circuit Court of the United States, for
the Western District Of Wisconsin,
HENRY AMY and GUsTAvUs HoPPENsTEDT,
Plaintiffs,
against
CITY OF WATERFOWL, defendant.
FINCHEs, LYNDE & MILLER,
Plaintiffs Attorneys.
DANIEL HALL and GEO, w. BIRD,
Defendants Attorneys.
BUM, J:-This is an action brought
upon three several bonds and interest
coupons issued by the City of Watertown
June lst, 1856, to the Milwaukee & Mad
ison Railroad Co. The bonds became
due January LIST, 1877, and the summons
was issued on June 19, 1888. TO avoid
the plea of the statute oflimitatioEs which
would otherwise appear upon the face of
the complaint to have run upon the bonds
and coupons. The Plaintiffs set out at
considerable length facts which it will
not be necessary to recite here in detail,
but which are intended to show that the
plaintiffs have been prevented from
bringing their action sooner by the
defendant city, and especially of the
Mayor and Common Council ia assem-
bling together after their election in each
year, and transactingIsome necessary bus.
mess for the city III secret place with
closed doors unknown to the plaintiffs
and the people at large, and with persons
on watch to inform them of the approach
of any person and their filing their resig-
nations, which by law took effect imme-
diately. In brief that the plaintiffs have
used due diligence to obtain service of the
summons but haYe been prevented by
the fraudulent acts of the officers of the
defendant city.
The defendant denies these allegations
and as separate defense sets out the
Statute of Limitations, to which plea the
plaintiffs demur and and the question is
whether these facts take the case out
from the operation of the Statute?
The Limitation applicable to the case
is found in Section l, Chap. So, General
Laws of Wisconsin for 1872, which is as fol
lows:
mo action brought to recover any sum Of
money on any bond coupon, interest warrant,
agreement or promise in writing made or issued
by any town, county, city or village, or upon any
installment of the principal or interest thereof
shall be maintained in any court unless such &C.
ton shall be commenced within six years from
the time when such sum OF money has or shall
become DUE"
There are several exceptions to the operation
of the statute contained IN the laws Of WiscOn-
sin, as
lst. Where the defendant is out of the state
I'd. Where defendant is an alien subject or
citizen of country at war with the United
States.
Sd. When the person entitled to bring the ac
ton is insane, under age, or imprisoned on a
criminal charge.
4th. Where the commencement of an action
has been stayed by injunction or statutary prohi-
bltiOn.
It is also provided that when the action is for
relief on the ground of fraud the cause of ac-
ton shall not be deemed to have accrued until
the discovery by the aggrieved party Of the facts
constituting the fraud.
statute relied upon by the plaintiffs in this
is whether there are any exceptions not found
in the statute that can be recognized by the
court.
In examining great many adjudged cases I'M
der similar statutes, find the prevailing ruling
to be that the language of the statute being gen
eral 1t must receive a general construction. Per-
haps it may be more logical to say that the Ian
guage of the statute being perfectly clear it is
wholly unnecessary to call in the aid of con-
strucJion to ascertain it's meaning. And that
1t is the duty of the court to enforce the law as
it finds it, and not to undertake to engraft upon
it exceptions and conditions that the legislature
has not seen fit to put into it. The law is clear
and Ineligible and by it's express terms applies
to all cases not falling III one or the other of
the excepted cases. 1t should, therefore, be
faithfully applied by the courts so as to make