Fort Worth gazette. [volume] (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1891-1898, 1894-01-09

TO said taxpayers benefit. h
as ii goes IL makes up the daihe
tie face of the bonds, iH
sinking fund is raised, anj ib
amount of said sinking fond. r@d
wise they would have,by lnl1
ton, themselves to pay, AID
amount 10 more than sufet
said deficit, then II goes dlie-YiN
use and benefit, as herelBbeils
Defendant contends, hovUa
ing to what he regards az an
apparent conflict in section tall
charter, the question Of Ne aq;t I
ity to require him to pay lAs 70
Of said sinking fund fOr he info
sought to be made, Il At laf,
and that therefore. under ihs u
presented by him the relief $500
city against him, to-Wit; ABB.
mnndamus, ought 10 be granti. II
reason Of the harshness Of W
should not be GRANTED. e1Ng =
where the right is clearlg NJ
tionably apparent. agree Wit
ciplas of the law which be inj n
TO my mind the right Of the Il u
the facts of this case, hs sias
petition, to require hin &c
the contract made by II. h
mtnt Of the sinldnr
the securities, as SCI y
petition, is plainly and unnils
parent, and II said fncts, af'N
tie petition be true, the pereliN
of mandamus should issue hfou
the foregoing reason 1t "a ny
the general demurrer, o. well p
ciNl exception raising said quesn
out in second, third and f9pn' Na
Of thc law issues hriynbefore TAI
me. Should he oyerruled
The reasons giveHioi ~ fllilH
court heretofore have HeiyeN'
and particu'arly. 10 the uiN4 q
posed by the civ, SO far Avs III
10 invest in the first ser'e ~
bonds. the sinking fund rai@A
dcmption Of other bonls "
series. As TO two Of the bond, 2
by the petition, il is proposed Z
with the sinking fund Of ths
s0rics of bonds. tO-wit The M !
ton bonds. II this is 10 be rec
Investment in said bonds; Of az
fund, raised for the redcmpl -
series of which they are a n.
course the same reason ahoreE
apply 10 them3 but II, BY f4Y
fact that as TO these Z
tho money that the treasury II
to nny for their purchase. ecmsc
sinking fund raised for the pun !
deeming the bonds Of thai -
series-I say, II by reason !, 4,
held that as 10 them the prn =
be n redemption In toto, q,
New York case, to the cxieul
cinol, and they remain 10 mst.
living simply for the pnrno&i q
interest up to their mainni d
event. | can not see upon w N
Of right the treasurer. coy 70
such investment Of The est
raised FOR this series Of : la
bonds Themselves Of that M q
II could not be said that VIII
warrants drawn on that pa a.
for the redemption Of honl' as
would he divertlng IL. or ihii tto
drawing uDon II for any ~,
than redeeming said b1naf l{e
foe, whether they fall unes w.
rule Of Investment. or W.
these two bonds, the nr0pq n (.
Of them would work their N3.I
whole or In part. by use XII
fund raised for their sufi
rulings made upon the df
he the same. II II be con'ei' y
city Is now payine S64 y 2.
than they should nay, ihnI a,ca
iin1nclering on the part o y
certainly. as between tw y
treasurer. the freasnrcr ~
do with that question. 1h,i ~,
OF discretion on the part q rs
eli, that the treasurer ga ~.
reHily or incidentally. raise
! have thus. ~ | unAer,n \
disposed Of all legal dufs1 Al
tho defendant by HE exgfi III
plaintiffs petition. and Y. a
rule all the executions q a.
to plaintiffs petition: am n, .,,.r
inc filed an acNeueni y Z"
substance. that this cise i've
n1w mon the facts AZ WEI :
and that the allcr1iio1s Q, )us
tanned In said petition. %.
IN snid answer. ore triei y ~
respectively. so Tar as ne M
ments OF fact slmnly, al' IS.
c,usions. and Il appear X ".
that said facts are IN w LEX ~.
pears In the statement q ! AZ
inhefore made. u y ~ IA
court that the facts alle,, 1p.h
tion, established by 81 ne
trne. cntitle the plainln =
ment asked for. and il.it s1r
lciged by defendant an9
true. by the agreement, "a
to excuse him from c9n's. s e
orler Of the clty. ana w
peremptory mandamus w
herein. ana Il is 20 nrlel..,,'
To the above lnds1Iia' f..,rI
the defendant exceplee 'ff'
court gave notice OF avs 'nII
Of civil appeals 4
Germany leads Die 'oA,