Hutchinson gazette. [volume] (Hutchinson, Kan.) 1895-1902, 1897-08-12
MORE BONDS OR NO BONDS.


MORE BONDS OR NO BONDS.
Petitions are now being circulated to
call a special election to vote sS5, 900
bonds for the Hutchinson 8 Southern
Improvement Company for putting in
terminal facilities in accordance with
the terms OF the special bill pushed
through the legislature last winter.
Clay and Valley townships are also be-
ing petitiOned to call township cleo
tiOns to vote bonds for bringing the
Frisco into Hutchinson.
There are some things connected
with this bond voting business which
il it were not so burdensOne would APP
peal to ones sense of humOr Bonds
were voted last spring for funding a
large floating indebtedness and the
street labOrers we're promised that
their scrip should straightway be paid
in cash. But though several months
have passed the bonds are still unsOld,
there appears to be small prospect of
selling them, and scrip, we are told,
has fallen ten per cent in value. Yet
Notwithstanding the fact that these
funding bonds cannot be sold, it is
proposed to vote $50, 900 more.
We have not been informed whether
the trouble with bonds which renders
them unstable is the rate of interest
which in the act authorizing their
issue, is limited, or whether they are
illegal, or whether the bonded indebt-
edness is already zoo high. Be that as
it may, the fact seems quite plain that
not only the act authorizing the ISSUE
ing OF the funding bonds but also the
act authorizing tie issue of the i'm
provement bonds are both uncOnstitu-
tional and void. No less legal au-
thOrity than Judge +. L. Martin au-
thOrizes us to quote him as so saying.
1t certainly seems very plain if an or
binary clOd hopper such as ye editor is
able to read.
Article XII, section l, of the cOnsti-
tuition of Kansas says: 1.-THE lsgisla-
ture shall pass no special act cOnferr-
ing corporate powers"
The United States district court,
which of course follows the decisions
of the state courts, passing upon this
section, said San act limited in its
to single city and single
election and the issue OF specific bonds
and which authorizes suca city to levy
and collect taxes to pay such bonds is
unconstitutional aud void. (NatiOnal
Bank Of Cleveland vs.. City of IOla.)
The only remaining question is as to
whether in passing the bills suthOriz.
ing the issue OF these bonds the legis-
lature attempted to confer any corpO-
rate powers. Upon this point, Judge
Dillon Of the United States circuit
court again said; "If the power to
create debt, binding upon the mn-
and to lay burdens upon all
the property within it to pay the debt
created, is not corporate power, it is
difficult to conceive what could Justly
be regarded as such"
Some years ago the city voted 800
600 to the Hutchinson Il Southern for
terminals under similar law, and it
was not attacked. The city is now
paying interest on these 800 900 with
the principal still outstanding against
the city, and there are not 80 much as
two stones lying together to show for
them. 1t is, we are informed, practic
ally the same concern that Is engineer
ing this scheme.
We are Informed that to obviate the
question of the illegality of those bonds,
the city council Immediately after they
had been issued, met and issued re-
fanding bonds in lieu of them, and
such bonds under the decisions of the
courts will stand This is doubtless
what would be done in the case now
before the city. But should the cleo
ton be held and the proposition carried,
the issue Of the bonds Gould be en-
Joined II the people of the minority are
Interested to do so. If they
are not. they ought 10 bear the burden
Of the bonds. AltoGsi6tr, the promo
sitiOn is not greatly to be tssred if the
people are vigiIant.