Weekly journal-miner., 1922-08-02
That is Purport of Supreme
 Court Decision in Famous 4-
 Way Bond Case Involving Land Given by Enabling Act.

An account of a decision by the state supreme court compelling the state to apportion to the four rail road bond counties the funds thus far gathered from the sale and lease Iof land set aside in the enabling act for the old bonds, is contained in a Phoenix newspaper reaching here yesterday. The decision means that Yavapai and its offspring, Coconino, and Maricopa and Pima counties will now recover from the state some of the money due them under the old enabling act clause, to repay funded bonds issued in the sos to pay for a railroad that never was built
 But the account in the Republican errs in stating that Maricopa insti- tuted the action. A representative of the Journal-Miner was called into the office of Deputy County Attor- ney E. s. Clark in this city over a year and half ago and given the first published account of concerted movement started by MT. Clark and (. B. Wilson of Flagstaff, to bring about the partition of the fund, then growing into respectable size in the treasury. MT. Wilson subsequently assumed the role of special counsel for the four counties, and all of the preliminary work except actual filing Of the papers, was done in Prescott at conferences participated in by the county attorneys or their representa- tives.
 Historical facts taken from the records are here quoted from the Republican:
 The state auditor and state treas urer must follow the mandate of the Maricopa county superior court and apportion to Pima, Yavapai, Coconi- no and Maricopa counties, the mon eys now accrued in the county bond land fund as applying toward the re- demption of nearly $2,O00,0OO in bonds and accrued interest incurred by these counties through the issu- ance of bonds to promote the build ing of a railway from Seligman thru Prescott and Phoenix to Tucson years ago.
 The case was filed in December 1920. in the Maricopa county superio- court by the county attorneys of the four counties involved. It came ur for a hearing before Judge Stanford on October Is, 1921, and the writ oi mandamus was handed down on Oc tober g. The defendants gave mo- tice of appeal at once.
 The bonds involved in the suit were issued by the counties between 1882 and 1887 and totaled nearly ST. 000,000 They were issued for the purpose of building a narrow gauge railroad from Seligman to Tucson. In some unknown manner, after the bonds had been issued by the coun- ties, they were turned over to the railroad company before the road was started. The railroad company sold the bonds and then failed to build the railroad.
 The counties then brought suit and one of the cases, Lewis vs. Pima county, was carried to the supreme court Of the United States, which in October, 1894, held that the territor- ial act, under which the Pima county bonds had been issued, was void and that the bonds issued by this county were invalid and not legal obliga- tion. By virtue of this decision, it was maintained that all of the bonds were invalid.
 In June, 1896, however, congress, by a special act, validated the entire issue of bonds to protect the pur chasers of the bonds whom they held to be the injured party. This act of was upheld by the su-