Abilene weekly reflector. [volume] (Abilene, Kan.) 1888-1935, 1897-02-18
EXHAUSTIVE OPINION.
JUDGE NooREs DECISION IN
THE GAS BONDS CASE.
Full Text Handed Down in One Of
Abilene's Old-Time Boom Schemes
City Not Liable For the Payment
Of Either Gas or Refunding Bonds


Fridays REFLECTOR that judge
Moore had rendered decision in thu
gas bonds matter was received by the
entire city with demonstrative ap'
proval. 1t will be a matter OF deep
interest to read the full text OF the
decision and the REFLECTOR gives ii
in full.
In the district court Of Dickinson
county, Kansas.
j. W. Edminson, plaintiff,
vs..
The City Of Abilene, defendant.
The plaintiff in this case brings this
action Of debt against the city of Abb
lene on account Of divers coupons de.
tached from certain municipal refund
ing bonds alleged to have been duly
and legally issued by the city of Abb
lene on the End day Of July, 1888.
The bonds from which these coupons
are detached, are a part Of a series,
ten in number, being for $500 each,
payable to H. G. Speer, or bearer, on
the last day Of July, 1898, at the fis-
cal agency, Of the state Of Kansas,
New York City, with interest thereon
at the rate Of six per cent. per annum,
from the LIST day Of July, A. D. 1888,
payable semi-annually, on the lst
days Of January and July Of each
year, on presentation Of the coupons
at such agency. Each bond contains
the recital that: "This bond is one
Of series Of like tenor, date and
amount, issued to refund outstanding
legal Indebtedness Of said city Of Abb
lene duly surrendered and cancelled,
in conformity to and in full compli-
ance with the provisions of chapter
so, laws of 1879, etc.
And in the body Of the bonds is
contained the following certificate
signed by the mayor and city clerk,
under the seal Of the city: "And it is
hereby certified and recited that all
acts, conditions and things required
to be done precedent to and in the is
suing of SAID bonds have been proper
ly done, happened and performed, in
regular and due form as required by
law: and that the total Indebtedness
of said city, inclusive, is within the
statutory limits"
The court then cites the proceed
ings Of the city council in full in re-
lation to the issuing of the refunding
bonds sued upon.
The record shows that the only |
proceedings had by the city council
before issuing the refunding bonds in
question, was the calling of special
meeting of the council and the adop-
ion of resolution. The request to
he mayor for the special meeting of
he council, the call for the special
meeting by the mayor and the special
Meeting ITSELF at which the resolu-
ion authorizing the mayor and city
Jerk to issue the refunding bonds and
axe up the "gas" bonds, all occurred
n the same day, June 29, 1888. The
efunding bonds were issued, and reg
stored in the office of"the auditor of
tate on July "a, 1888. Subsequent
Y on August 8, 1888, the council
dopted another resolution repeating
he authority to issue the refunding
onds in question.
The court then says
No ordinance was ever passed by
he city council relative to the issu-
lg of said refunding bords described
| the petition.
Both the original "gas bonds" and
ne refunding bonds as described in
he petition were duly registered in
he office OF the auditor Of state as re-
uired by law.
The plaintiff had no notice o! the
urpose for which nor the manner in
hich the bonds described in his Pc {
ton were issued other than is dis
Iosed by the public records Plain
If purchased the coupons from N. I
7. Harris & Co. who were innocent
olders thereof, and all their rights 9
,ssed to the plaintiff, and plaintiff |
therefore, entitled to all the pro- /
ction which the law gives to holders G
this class Of securities who pur- a
lased them without notice and for t