Northern Bank of Toledo v. Porter Township Trustees
Supreme Court of the United States
IN ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES EOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO. This was an action to recover principal and interest of bonds issued by the defendant in error (also defendant below), in payment of a subscription to a railroad. The defence of want of legislative authority is set forth in the opinion of the court. Yerdict for the defendants. The plaintiffs excepted to the charge, and brought the case here by writ of error.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Harlaw
On the 15th day of April, 1851, the commissioners of Delaware County, Ohio, passed an order submitting to the voters of that county, at a special eleetión to be held on the 17th day of June thereafter, a proposition to subscribe the sum of $50,000 to thercapital stock of the Spriñgfiéld and Mansfield. Ráilroad Company, a corporation creatéd under the laws of that State, and whose name was subsequently changed to that of the Springfield, Mount Yernon and Pittsburgh Railroad Company. This proposition ivas approved by the electors, and subsequently, August 4th, 1851, the county commissioners…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Cohens v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1821
- Town of Coloma v. EavesSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Board of Comm'rs of Knox Cty. v. AspinwallSupreme Court of the United States · 1859
- Buchanan v. LitchfieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- Carroll v. Lessee of CarrollSupreme Court of the United States · 1854
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by69 opinions
- Baumgartner v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Waite v. Santa CruzSupreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Dixon County v. FieldSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Carroll County v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1884
- Nesbit v. Riverside Independent DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
64 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.