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

tCit must he raised IN rvmc Way aus
the sinking fund Is not maae, ~,
city must raisc u by inNA-
lion. for ali the taxable property within
its limits is pledged for the payment OF
100 cents on the dollar. Of tho lace Nalua
of said bonds. think i would DC az
rrrtHintd his proper examination un "
culation, taking into consideration the de-
laws incident both to the collection anu ne
accumulation of the sinking fnnd. HN'
negotiation Of proper investment for the
same. npd the further fact that securlnes
such az the sinking fund is authorized 70
be invested In. can seldom be obtained
herring more than Q per cent interest per
annum, that Il will require prompt acton
ON tho part u the city council IN invest
Ing such sinking fund TO enable the same
10 earn the difference between inc Princl
pal Of said fund and the face value o.
snid bonds by tho time such bonds shnli
MIXTURE. But should, by iudicious lnj
prntnpt Investments. said sinking fund be
innde 10 earn more than sufficient to make
such difference, then ihc cAr!HS hFc"h.r
The property Of the city and innres to ~
beueft. and to the benoht OF its taxpayers
Hence. IL becomes q matter OF Nial in,,Hr'
est 10 the city and TO each taxpayer WIN
ga ifs limit thni all sinking funds rhiFN
for the redemption Of It's bonds be prompt
~ iuyosfed IN interest paying st'..t ~ N7
fast as the same accumulate. sach Gay
OF insufficient amount lie idle In the treas
ury Of the city said city loses, and th'rg-
forc ia tho poorer by the amount such
funds would have yielded were tliey IN
vested in interest paying securities.
From the foregoing IT seems TO me 10
be- manifest that the plaintlug petition
SLOWS beyond question that u has such
intcrest in the subject matter OF tliS
suit as would cntiilc II so maintain the
same. and that therefore the hrst question
raised by defendants general demurrer
40 plaintiffs petition, "a above set out,
must be resolved in favor of the PAINFUL
and against thc defendant
Before coming TO u consideration OF tue
other questions rJised by the general do
murrcr, | deem 81 proper hrst 10 CON
slider the two objections raised by. special
execution. and numbered ia the divisions
above oct out. as eve ard six he-
cuusc said questions, as well as the one
just conidered. are. in their nature, SOME
what preliminary.
take M then. objection. No. .; that
S. ihut the plaintiff petition b. iusnt
6cont because 4 fails TO show that the
Investment OF the sinking fund proposed
therein tu be made. hU4 been authorized,
approved or acguesccd 10 by the comp
troiler. or that sald comptroller has been
notified Of sid proposed Investment.
Counsel for defendant jon argument COM
lends that undpr and hy virtue Of The
PROVISIONS of section ~ of p,aiuNN's char
tur al Investments Of The sinking funds
raised by plaintiff FOR payment OF ~
H'Nis, Wu'l oe nANti i y. W; WIN
W. tl"" lelse' ,unu'i ll' rupDiN 'el,A, Vl
VI tho comptroller IT thr states aud That
therefore any Investment 10y Plaintiff or
bu'1 AHlkhE luhl'' Il rWprl 10 po
l''lV WllN'"l N' N"'W l'n-'' Apli 'Nal ol
ns,Wl'Sl'., guy ''h OFT lhv ..lN ',Nl
.tgli'F Ht-i'h '!Hn'' 1-" Wl.h
~ uclNnaahl luS com non
san Srouon W proNle- luat
inc uuly Oh we coihptlNH,t 10 ecN
thot lax q lrYlrd hhl rn'lcclcd 10y
ih' city, sufficient 10 phy tho interest
tym'-annno;ly on oil bonds l'5nrl' ana 10
r'vltr a sinking luud sufficient % pay
luhl is lufesiNl lh gpod e'i-hc1flnEi
hHHurucr " Wund 0prF fhetelruui
l,Al me dn'y ~ me c1nlpiroler TO see
that ~ sinking iund M Invested IN proper
sNruuurs. IS phI on parallel win Ms
uniN 70 sec Slni a TAX is levied ana
cnI,'Nel, snucleht To nay the interest
ona create q sinking iuud for tho re-
i'mnuon OF h9nlS is'lird, llis duty In
Pe'l 20 sn'h Investment 4 no more
hln3ihg On nm, ana hls authority over The
t3ine p" greater ihnn iF his nuiy and
nuhouty win respect Co The levy and
ruhneiion OF the iaN therein referred TO.
conld not Dc vuntrnded that The city
y without authority TO levy and. collect
a tax OF tue kind mentioned no this sec
Nea' without having hrsl obtained per
mission from the comptrnllur so 90 do
because, without considering tie nhanrOtv
81 such q position, u j. manifest from
imperative duly Of lcyylug such tax,
whcn mourning the Indebtedness evil
utncnd by such bonds " laid upon said
CITY oy the mnlumcutl law VI rs exist.
enoe, and should 70 fail 10 do So, u
Mouiu' upon br2per applcouon' pc 10y the