Lewis v. Clarendon
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Arkansas
This action is brought to recover on overdue interest coupons cut from negotiable bonds issued by the city of Clarendon to the Arkansas Central Railway Company, in payment of a $15,000 subscription made by the city to the capital stock of said company. The following is a copy of one of the bonds: “State of Arkansas, City of Clarendon.
Read the full summary
This action is brought to recover on overdue interest coupons cut from negotiable bonds issued by the city of Clarendon to the Arkansas Central Railway Company, in payment of a $15,000 subscription made by the city to the capital stock of said company. The following is a copy of one of the bonds: “State of Arkansas, City of Clarendon. No. 17. $15,000 Subscription to the Arkansas Central Railway. $500. Know all men by these presents, that the city of Clarendon, in the state of Arkansas, in conformity to the will of a majority of the legal voters of the said corporation, as expressed at an…
1Opinion of the Court
CALDWELL, District Judge.
The defendant city could not subscribe to the capital stock of a railroad company, and issue its bonds in payment of such subscription, unless it was authorized so to do by law. Authority for the defendant to subscribe to the capital stock of the Arkansas Midland Railroad company, and issue its bonds in payment therefor, is found in sections 16 and 15 of the charter of said company; and if the bonds in suit are void obligations, it is because they were issued under the authority of those sections.
It is a settled principle that where two or more railroad companies…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Farmers' & Mechanics' National Bank v. DearingSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Casey v. GalliSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Commissioners of Douglas County v. BollesSupreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Eaton v. . AspinwallNew York Court of Appeals · 1859
- Jones v. Cincinnati Type Foundry Co.Indiana Supreme Court · 1860
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- McGillivray v. Joint School District No. 1Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1901
- Heinze v. Butte & Boston Consolidated Min. Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1903
- San Diego Flume Co. v. SoutherCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1898