Arizona republican., 1898-01-09
Sustained By Decision of Judge
 Street Yesterday
THE YAYAPAI BONDS CASE
The Application for an Injunc-
 ton Denied
Ob igations Which Have Been Un- dertake n May Not Be Dfsmis ssd Upon Techn al Grounds - He Who Receives Must Pay.


 against the territorial loan commis- sion, denying the injunction applied for by the plaintiff Tie order is as follows:
 "On the 12th day of March, 1885, the legislative assembly of the teTrito. y of Arizona passed an act to aid in the obstruction of a railroad in Yavapal county, in which was authorzed the issuance of bonds on the faith and credit of Yavapai county, in the amount of $4,O00 per mile for the con- struction of a railroad from a point near Chino station on the Atlantic & Pacific railroad to Prescott, and to the northern boun 1ary of Maricopa county Soon thereafter was constructed the Prescott & Arizona Central railroad from point near Chino station called Seligman, to the city of Prescott, all in Yavapai county, Arizona, and the bonds of Yavapai county were issued to the company constructing said rail road to the number or 292 and in the denomination of one thousand dollars each. Interest was paid on those bonds from the date of their issuance in the year 1895, until and inclusive of the year 1893; and twenty-seven of such bonds were redee med during that period by Yavapai county, and so far as the court is informed, the balance of said bonds are outstanding, excep. the number of 203, which, on the 17.h day of September, 1897, were exchanged by the territorial loan commission for territorial funding bonds. !. This action was commenced by Yavapai county on the first day of October, 1897, in this court against M. H. McCord, Charles H. Akers, C. P. Leitch and George w. Vickers as the territorial loan commissioners, to ob- tssn an injunction restraining the ex- change of Prescott & Arzona Central railroad bonds, so-called, for terri torial funding bonds
 ~'The evidence shows that on the 17th day of September, 1897, said de fendants, McCord, Akers and Leiteh, as territorial loan commissioners, Leitch being absent, had exchanged territorial funding bonds for said | Prescott & Arizona Central railroad bonds in a sufficient amount to cos e. the principal of 2O3 of such bonds of the denomination of 1,OO0 each and the interest thereon, which were he'd at that time by Kitchen & company of New York; and that Kitchen & com delivered to the loan commissioners for the purpose of cancellation, 203 of said Yavapai county bonds, so issuei to the Prescott & Arizona Central Railroad company bonds, and that the same are now held by and in the GUS tody of the treasurer of the territory of Arizona.
 f'Under the principles which control courts of equity in injunction procead- ings, in that they do not order the is suance of writ of injunction for ac, s already completed, this case might be imme diately disposed of and the in junction denied, but as It appears to the court that as many as forty-tWo of such bonds are yet outstanding, and which are liable to be presented to the loan commission at any time to be funded, the question is pressed upon the court as to whether the loan com- i missioners would be required to ex- 1 change the territorial funding bonds fcfo " bonds issued to the Prescott & Arizona Central railroad.
 "It is strongly urged by the p,ainsiff that the act of the territorial legisla- tive assembly of March 12, 1885, au- i thorizi1g such bonds to be issued, is | invalid as in contravention of an act of congress, paragraph 1889 of the re- vfsed statutes of the United Sta>es, as amended June 8, 1878.
 ''It is also urged by counsel for plaintiff that the statute which was passed by the territorial g.slature March 12, 1885, was a contract manda- tory iR it's nature; and, hence, beyond the power of any legislative body CfEL lhoI OI SOASISSo CudCt, ludI such acts in their nature can but be permissive and not mandatory How ever correct that may be in law, the i court begs to remind counsel that this is not an action resisting a mandata to compel the issuing of bonds, but that It is an injunction upon the part of Yavapai county to prevent the e0- change of bonds. which they, them l selves have already permitted to be issued for bonds which, by an act of congress (and which we shall here after speak oD were authorized to be ! issued for certain indebtedness of the territory and the counties of the ter