The record-union., 1891-06-02
BATES WAS BARRED.
Decision for the City in One of the
Bond Cases.
The Supreme Court Says That Bond
holder Bates Was Barred by the
Statute of Limitations.

The Supreme Court has rendered an
opinion in the case of George T.. Bates
(appellant) VS.. Eugene j. Gregory lex
Mayor of Sacramento) ct al, and it was
filed yesterday in Deputy Clerk Govan's
office in this city.
The action was an application for writ
of mandate to compel the Board of Trus-
tees of Sacramento to issue to Bates new
bonds of the city in accordance with the
provisions of the Act of March %, 1864, in
exchange for unpaid bonds held by him
that had been issued under the provis-
ions of the Acts of April 26, 1853, and
April 10, 1854.
The opinion recites the history of Sac
ramento City, and the various Acts
passed creating the Common Council and
afterward the Board of Trustees, and au-
thorizing the issuance Of bonds at various
times.
on March p, 1864, the Legislature
passed "An Act to provide for the lIqul-
dation of the Indebtedness of the City OF
Sacramento which accrued prior to jan
uary l, 1859. By this Act it was provided
that the holders OF all claims against the
city which accrued prior to the LIST day OF
January. 1903, 1lllStlO I)ISocliC eItO ot'hiO
the Board of Trustees, and that the Doaru
should cause to be issued bonds, payable
to bearer on February l, 1868, Tor all such
claims as they might upon examination
consider legal and just.
Mr.. Bates, having become the owner OF
these bonds-one for S544 40, dated May o.,
1854. and payable July l, 1874, with forty
semi-annual coupons attached, for 81 %
each, and two of 81 900 each, issued
April 9th and 26, 1854, and payable on
July /, 1874, with forty semi-annual cOu-
pons of $50 each attached-nade de-
mand October II, 1887, upon the board
that it issue TO him bonds as contem-
plated by the Act above referred toy for
the amount of the principal Of the said
bonds, and for all the coupons thereon
which matured on or before January /,
1859 Upon the refusal of the board to
issue him the bonds as demanded he
commenced this proceeding to compel
the same.
The court found that Mr.. Bates claim
was barred by the statute of limitations,
and rendered Judgment in favor OF the
city, from which the plaintiff has APP
pealed. The Supreme Court says:
by the terms of the bonds, they ma
tured on July l, 1874, and consequently
would be barred by limitation on the
claimed by Mr.. Bates, the statute OF
limitations has no application. The appel
liant, however, contends that the statute
OF limitations is not applicable, for the
reason that by the provisions of the Act
of 1885, incorporating tine City and
County OF Sacramento and also the Act
of 1868, incorporating the City Of Sacra-
mento' he was prevented from bringing
any action to enforce their collection, and
inVokeS the provisions Of Section 3j6,
Code of Civil Procedure. which declares :
when the commencement OF an action
is stayed by injunction or statutory pro-
libitlOn, the time OF the continuance OF
the Injunction or prohibition is not part
OF the time limited for the commence
ment Of the action lie also urges that
inaSmuch as the Act OF March y, 1854,
above mentioned, does not limit the time
within which an application for refund
ing under it's terms NAV be made, the
statute of limitations has no application.
The provisions in the Act Of March
%, 1851, that the body polite then created
might sue and be sued in all courts and
IN all actions whatsoever entered into
and made a part of the contract OF the
municipality in the issuance of the bonds
in question. The Legislature could not
thereafter, without impairing the obliga-
ton of the contract, pass any Act which
would deprive a holder of these bonds
OF the right TO sue their maker. This
principal is so familiar and so fully set
tied as hardly to require the citation
of authorities.
1--WE are of the opinion that the holder
of the bonds in question has at no time
since July /, 1874, been prevented by any
statutory provision rom bringing an &C
ton TO recover the amount of the bonds;
and also that the corporations which were
created by the Acts of 1853 and 1868 We're
respectively III law the successor Of the
corporation that issued the bonds, and
liable to be sued thereon
at could not have been the intention
of the Legislature by the Act Of March
p, 1864, to extend the time for refunding
the Indebtedness of the city beyond the
time within which an action upon that
Indebtedness could have been com
menced. At the date of that Act more
than ten years remained before the ma
turity of the bonds i'll question. The
bonds held by the petitioner had no fund
provided for their redemption, but were
dependent solely upon the, faith and
credit of the city.
1.-THE Act of 1864 gave to the holder OF
these bonds the privilege of exchanging
them for other bonds bearing a lower rate
of interest, but secured in their payment
by the fund provided therein for their
redemption. An option WAS thus ex-
tended TO the holder of such bonds to
make the exchange, and this option could
be exercised at any time during the life
of the bonds. a failure on his part to
present them TO the Board of Trustees
and demand the issuance of new bonds
IN their place until after they had become
barred by the statute of limitations
would give to the board the right, if they
chose to exercise it, OF refusing to issue
new bonds therefor upon this ground. 4
municipal corporation has the legal right
to avail itself Of the defense Of the statute
of limitations as fully.as any other cred
itor. 1t is a privilege personal to Tho
debtor. and whenever in any legal pro.
ceeding it is invoked by the debtor, the
court is compelled TO recognize it as
proper defense. This defense is pleaded
il the present proceeding, and, as We
have before shown, is sustained by the
facts, and must. therefore, be held suffi-
cient. The judgment and order appealed
from are affirmed"
The opinion is written by Justice Har-
risOn and concurred in by Justices De-
Haven, Sharpstein, Garoutte, Paterson
and Mcfarland Chief Justice Beatty
being disqualified, took no part in the
decision.
AN UNSEEN WASHOUT
Accident to a Pleasure Party on sat