Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1906-12-04
EXCERPT OF THE
BOND DECISION
SUPREME COURTS OPINION RE.
vERsINa JUDGE SLOAN RE-
cElvED IN THE CITY
Says Bonds Are Valid And Treasurer
Can Not Be Restrained in coliec-
ton of The Tax-Whole County
Liable.

The opinion Of the supreme court
In the case Of Suits VS.. r. P. Dana,
treasurer, ct al, which was recently
handed down has been received by
the counsel interested. The court
notes the character of the case, which
was an action brought to restrain the
county treasurer from collecting the
bond tax levied by the board Of super.
visors upon all of the property Of the
county, the purpose being to exempt
the city from such taxation.
The facts are not seriously in dis.
pute. The supervisors first issued
bridge warrants to pay for the BULL
ing and repair Of bridges, and after
wards took them up with bonds pur-
chased by the Northwestern Mutual
Life Insurance company Of Milwaukee,
an dthe taxes we're levied to pay the
bonds and the interest thereon against
all of the property Of the country.
Bond Holder Must Be Party.
With reference to the holder Of the
bonds the court says:
1--WE shall assume that the board
had no authority to issue the bonds
for the purpose and in the amount it
the county is estopped from asserting
their invalidity, the case is the same
as If there were precedent authority.
This is the rule as to an innocent
holder OF bonds at least, and he is en-
titled to have the taxes already levied
and in process Of collection paid to
him. Certainly there can be no diver
sion OF this fund, and no act done by
court Of other authority which will de-
prive him of his right to these taxes,
unless he be n1aue party to the suit
and given chance to be heard. When
1t is once conceded that the board Of
supervisors had authority to levy this
bond and interest tax upon all pro-
perty in the county, 1t is manifest
that the holder can not be deprived
thereof at suit of tax payers among
themselves to which the bond holder
is not made a party.
Counsel for appellant said in oral
argument that they made no question
of defect Of parties and that so far az
possible they waived this point. But
it is apparent that the bond holder Is
a necessary party to the litigation and
that without him there can be no bind
4
Has Right to Levy Tax.
III the bonds were issued by author.
ity of law or If the county issuing
them is estopped from denying want
of authority, which in effect amounts
to the same thing as if authority were
granted in the first place, we think 1t
clear that the board of supervisors
had the right and that it was it's duty
under Section 406 of the Code to levy
a tax upon all taxable property in the
county for the payment Of interest and
principal Of the bonds.
Where acting or assuming to act
for the county, the board represents
all of the inhabitants thereof and Ill
persons therein who have property
subject to taxation for county pur.
poses and the estoppel is by reason
Of the conduct of these agents, who
represent, or apparently represent all
the inhabitants and not simply those
who live in certain parts thereof. The
case is different from one where the
debtors are Jointly and severally and
personally liable, in this, that the bond
holders can not sue the individual
members of the community. He must
secure his money from tax levy eth
er voluntarily or involuntarily made,
The board having authority to make
voluntarily levy to pay these bonds
and the interest upon them, anr fay-
ing made levy with which to pay a
part thereof, some Of the parties liza.
BILE therefore can not in an action to
which the bond holder is not made a
party, by injunction against the col.
lection agents, destroy the bond hold.
er's right to have this tax collected
and paid over to II"
The court goes on to state that
even with the bond holder party to
the suit it can not been seen how he
could be deprived Of rights to have
the taxes levied to pay these obliga.
tons, which, so far as the county is
concerned, are as valid as if they had
been issued by express statutory au-
thority.
BoNAPARTE.
Bonaparte, Dec. 1.-Mr. and Mrs.
or1,1 ,,t Ia, ~ 49,.