Board of Com Rs of Gunnison County, Colo v. Rollins Sons

Decision Date20 February 1899
Docket NumberNo. 178,178
Citation43 L.Ed. 689,173 U.S. 255,19 S.Ct. 390
PartiesBOARD OF COM'RS OF GUNNISON COUNTY, COLO., v. E. H. ROLLINS & SONS
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

John F. Dillon and E. F. Richardson, for respondent.

T. C. Brown and C. S. Thomas, for petitioner.

Mr. Justice HARLAN delivered the opinion of the court.

This action was brought by E. H. Rollins & Sons, a corporation of New Hampshire, to obtain a judgment against the board of commissioners of Gunnison county, Colo., a municipal corporation of that state, for the amount of certain coupons of bonds issued by the defendant in 1882. At the close of the evidence the defendant requested a peremptory instruction in its behalf. The circuit court charged the jury at some length, but concluded with a direction to find a verdict for the defendant, which was done, and a judgment in its favor was entered. That judgment was reversed in the circuit court of appeals, and the case is here upon writ of certiorari. 49 U. S. App. 399, 26 C. C. A. 91, and 80 Fed. 692.

The case made by the complaint is as follows:

By the laws of Colorado, boards of county commissioners were authorized to examine, allow, and settle all accounts against their respective counties, and to issue county warrants therefor; to build and keep in repair the county buildings, to insure the same, and to provide suitable rooms for county purposes; and to represent the county, and have the care of county property, and the management of the business and concerns of the county, in all cases where the law did not otherwise provide.

On the 1st day of December, 1882, the defendant board caused to be made and executed certain bonds, acknowledging the county of Gunnison to be indebted and promising to pay to _____, or bearer, the sum therein named, for value received, redeemable, at the pleasure of the county, after 10 years, and absolutely due and payable 20 years after date, at the office of the county treasurer, wit interest at 8 per cent per annum, payable semiannually on the 1st days of March and September in each year, at the county treasurer's office, or at the Chase National Bank in the city of New York, at the option of the holder, upon the presentation and surrender of the annexed coupons as they severally became due.

Each bond contained this recital: 'This bond is issued by the board of county commissioners of said Gunnison county in exchange, at par, for valid floating indebtedness of the said county outstanding prior to September 2, 1882, under and by virtue of, and in full conformity with, the provisions of an act of the general assembly of the state of Colorado, entitled 'An act to enable the several counties of the state to fund their floating indebtedness,' approved February 21, 1881; and it is hereby certified that all the requirements of law have been fully complied with by the proper officers in the issuing of this bond. It is further certified that the total amount of this issue does not exceed the limit prescribed by the constitution of the state of Colorado, and that this issue of bonds has been authorized by a vote of a majority of the duly-qualified electors of the said county of Gunnison voting on the question at a general election duly held in said county on the seventh day of November, A. D. 1882. The bonds of this issue are comprised in three series, designated 'A,' 'B,' and 'C,' respectively, the bonds of series 'A' being for the sum of one thousand dollars each, those of series 'B' for the sum of five hundred dollars each, and those of series 'C' for the sum of one hundred dollars each. This bond is one of series 'A.' The faith and credit of the county of Gunnison are hereby pledged for the punctual payment of the principal and interest of this bond.'

To each bond were attached coupons for the semiannual interest, signed by the county treasurer.

On the 1st day of December, 1882, for the bonds of the county, with coupons attached, as above specified, the defendant board made an exchange with the parties then holding county warrants which before that time, in accordance with the statutes in such case made and provided, had been issued to them in settlement of claims presented by them against the county. In every case when warrants were presented they were exchanged for the bonds of the county at par for their face and interest. In each case the blanks were filled out with the name of the party receiving the bonds or exchanging the warrants, and the blank for the place of payment filled in as the banking house of the Chase National Bank in the city of New York. Thereupon the bonds were signed by the chairman of the board of county commissioners, countersigned by the county treasurer, and attested by the county clerk with the seal of the county; and the coupons attached were also filled out, stating the place of payment to be in the city of New York, at the banking house of the Chase National Bank, and stating also the number of the funding bond, and the series to which it was attached.

The issue of bonds as above set forth was authorized by a vote of the qualified electors to be exchanged for warrants, and the amount thereof was spread upon the records of the county, as provided for by the act of February 21, 1881, entitled 'An act to enable the several counties of the state to fund their floating indebtedness.' In all other respects the terms and conditions of the act were fully complied with. The bonds were duly registered in the office of the auditor of the state.

In every case where bonds were issued and delivered to the payee, or to any person for him, the parties received them in exchange for warrants, the amount of the bonds being the same as the amount of the warrants and interest thereon that had theretofore been issued by the county.

From the 1st day of December, 1882, and up until the 1st day of March, 1886, the county paid the interest on the bonds semiannually in accordance with their terms and of the coupons attached to them.

The defendant board made default in the payment of interest due on the 1st day of September, 1886, and made like default thereafter up to and including September 1, 1892.

The plaintiff was the holder and owner of coupons formerly attached to and belonging to certain bonds of the above issue. It asked judgment for the aggregate amount of the principal of the coupons, with interest on the amount of each coupon as it became due.

The answer of the county contained a general denial of all the allegations of the complaint, and, in addition, set out 11 affirmative defenses, which were chiefly based upon the alleged fact that the county, in issuing the bonds set forth in the complaint, had attempted to incur an indebtedness not authorized by the constitution of Colorado, or by the statute referred to in the bonds.

The provision of the constitution of Colorado prescribing the extent to which counties may become indebted, and to which the bonds referred, is as follows:

'No county shall contract any debt by loan in any form, except for the purpose of erecting necessary public buildings, making or repairing public roads and bridges; and such indebtedness contracted in any one year shall not exceed the rates upon taxable property in such county, following, to wit: Counties in which the assessed valuation of taxable property shall exceed five millions of dollars, one dollar and fifty cents on each thousand dollars thereof. Counties in which such valuation shall be less than five millions of dollars, three dollars on each thousand dollars thereof. And the aggregate amount of indebtedness of any county for all purposes, exclusive of debts contracted before the adoption of this constitution, shall not at any time exceed twice the amount above herein limited, unless when in manner provided by law, the question of incurring debt shall, at a general election, be submitted to such of the qualified electors of such county as in the year last preceding such election shall have paid a tax upon property assessed to them in such county, and a majority of those voting thereon shall vote in favor of incurring the debt; but the bonds, if any be issued therefor, shall not run less than ten years, and the aggregate amount of debt so contracted shall not at any time exceed twice the rate upon the valuation last herein mentioned: provided that this section shall not apply to counties having a valuation of less than one million of dollars.' Laws Colo. 1877, p. 62.

The act of February 21, 1881, referred to in the bonds in question, contains, among other provisions, the following:

'Section 1. It shall be the duty of the county commissioners of any county having a floating indebtedness exceeding ten thousand dollars, upon the petition of fifty of the electors of said counties [county] who shall have paid taxes upon property assessed to them in said county in the preceding year, to publish for the period of thirty days in a newspaper published within said county, a notice requesting the holders of the warrants of such county to submit in writing to the board of county commissioners, within thirty days from the date of the first publication of such notice, a statement of the amount of the warrants of such county which they will exchange at par, and accrued interest, for the bonds of such county, to be issued under the provisions of this act, taking such bonds at par. It shall be the duty of such board of county commissioners at the next general election occurring after the expiration of thirty days from the date of the first publication of the notice aforementioned, upon the petition of fifty of the electors of such county who shall have paid taxes upon property assessed to them in said county in the preceding year, to submit to the vote of the qualified electors of such county who shall have paid taxes on property assessed to them in said county in the preceding year, the question whether the board of county commissioners shall issue bonds of such county under the provi ions of this...

To continue reading

Request your trial
111 cases
  • Hughes County, S.D., v. Livingston
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • October 9, 1900
    ... ... Hughes, by its board of county commissioners, has caused ... this bond to be ... 613, 40 ... L.Ed. 760; E. H. Rollins & Sons v. Board of ... Com'rs, 80 F. 692, 699, 26 C.C.A ... ...
  • State v. Greer
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • October 9, 1924
    ... ... value ( County of Jefferson v. B. C. Lewis & Sons, ... 20 Fla ... Gunnison County Com'rs v. E. H. Rollins & Sons, ... 173 ... statutes ... In ... Board of Commissioners of the County of Knox v ... ...
  • Independent School Dist. of Sioux City v. Rew
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (8th Circuit)
    • September 23, 1901
    ... ... resolution of the board of directors of the district ... township; that ... prescribed for county bonds, and the form prescribed for ... county ... City of New Orleans (C.C.) 33 F. 196; Rollins v ... Chaffee Co. (C.C.) 34 F. 91; Wilson v ... 613, 40 L.Ed. 760; E. H. Rollins & Sons v. Board ... of Com'rs of Gunnison Co., 80 F ... ...
  • Board of Com'rs of Stanly County v. Coler
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
    • February 4, 1902
    ... ... See, also, ... the recent case of Gunnison Co. v. E. H. Rollins & ... Sons, 173 U.S. 255, 19 Sup.Ct. 390, 43 L.Ed ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results
1 books & journal articles
  • The Municipal Bond Cases Revisited.
    • United States
    • American Bankruptcy Law Journal Vol. 94 No. 4, December 2020
    • December 22, 2020
    ...threshold. Id. (94) On the limitation that the record be made authoritative by law, see Gunnison Cty. v. E.H. Rollins & Sons, 173 U.S. 255 (95) See, eg., Lake Cty. v. Graham, 130 U.S. 674 (1889); Dist. Township of Doon v. Cummins, 142 U.S. 366 (1892); Nesbit v. Indep. Dist. of Riverside......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT