Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1890-12-18

statutes are such and such only as those statutes
confer.
1t therefore remains that the charter Of a cor
poration is the m azure of its powers. and that
the enumeration OF these powers implies the ex
clu ion of all Others.
Now then exp essly set forth AMI alleged In
the p,eadings, minutely and in detail, in refer
ence to the bonds in question are the powers
conferred upon the International AMI Grear
none Of which dill the right to execute such
bonds ever exist. The pl inlif fai ed to meet
the Issue but took a nonsuit, vir ua.ly con ess-
ing thereby the correctness OF the states allie
cations.
Their are but few covers that can be exer-
else wi more Damaging effect upon corporaie
property or the public than th- one BY which
debts are created. To pay d BITS the corpora
tion must have fun Is. To procure funds it must
levy tax or rate upon tine tr fiji ; viii III it car
ri, As seq ,ence. therefore. lis traffic rates
must grow in proportion to lis Indebt .duess
raie fund- necessary with which to paw
it. II the indebt dne,s Is Ii .ht low rate on
the traffic only may demanded. If it is avy.
necessar ly the tax rate must be increased o
pay it. The levy Of traffic rate is 'vereign
upon express or implied conditions. rh- issu-
ance Of debt obligations involves the exercise Of
that power SO vested. and it that power is abused
the corporate properly suffers and The charter
contract Is violated. If the corporate property
suffers the pu pic l.; to that extent injured and
shou ID have its remedy.
The constitution expressly requires the attor-
new general TO take such &C ion in the name Of
the state as may be proper and necessary to pre-
vent any private CORPORATION from exercising
any power not authorize BY law. The cont.n-
tion of appellant IS that the appelees' clai n is
an Illegal and unauthorized one: that it require
the exercise OF cornorate powers and action to
pay it; that incre OF the traffic rates the
railroad would become neces ,ary o do so. and
in that pa -ticul " the public would be affected
and injured nv acts in violation OF the letter and
spirit of ths law.
Che court will observe that as to said bonds
the state contends. first. that they were pro-
bited by the express provisions h. law and
second, that thev were not authorized BY any
law. II there had been no express provis on
against the issuance OF such securities, they
would have been void il they Involved the ex-
ercise OF corporate power unless they were au-
,horized law II tina. can be established why
should not the corporation be restrained from
paying theml
Again, the purpose for which Indebtedness
can be incurred BY railway company is limited
to such sums of money as NAV be necessary for
constructing. compile ing. improving, oper-
ating the raj way; an the power 10 incur it
must be exercised by corporate board OF direc-
tors legally ected. In the case at bar the state
show that the bonds were not issuei By any
board of directors nut horized to act for any
OF the purposes expressly pointed out in the
statute, but that they were creatures of specu-
lative scheme to FIX burdens u, on the public ex-
clusively for pirate gain. with notice OF these
facts to the owners fore buying the bonds,
whv sho1ld tn " not be C Incele1?
II the state Is not interested as party to the
charter cont act, or as a defender of the public
interest IN holding the corporation to its egi
obiigt tons and within lis corporate powers.
then what party can bef She alleged that nei
ther of the receivers, nor the corporation, nor
the stockhode would make defense, but that
they were colluding for the purpose of fixing the
bonds as a debt upon the road by decree OF the
court.
No sane man can doubt that railway debt Is
a public burden. and that ali public bur lens
mnst be dis, harged by taxation in some form.
The state the county, the city Issue thei. bonds
and lew tax to pay them A railway COM
pany issues binds to pay which ii collects a toll
from .he traffic OF the country which il carries.
30 1t goes; If county or city issues bonds
without express authority, they are void II
they isAue them beyond an amount authoriz. I'd
by law, the whole or the excess thereof il in
valid according to he conditions AFT citing them.
II suit is brought Upon v!id bonds against a
county or city. and fnal Judgment is rendered
thereon, who then could refuse to pay
the tax to meet this established debt?
Who could inquire into the facts
on which that ia igem mt was rendere II Usually
no one. BY what autnoritv. therefore. can o
CORPORATION in charge of . public ghway, en-
d wed with the power freely 10 collect a toll
from the traffic it carries to meet its just de-
man is, issu. q fictitious debt. binding upon the
public II established by Judgment. that could
stand in more favor with the law or courts than
one OF like kind executed by q municipal corpo-
ration? They derive their powers from the same
source and must exercise them within prescribed
limits or their acts equally ultra wires.
1t IL trusted that this court in considering the
questions herein raised will not follow far
the ilusory phi intom commonly called ''fnno-
cent purchaser. " for the trial court should not
be denie d view OF . chafscser whose presence
is always 90 inseparably connected with such
transactions - are hers In issue.
tha eoAclns.oa that tie s;ate il tbs p.opes