Board of County Commissioners of the City and County of Denver v. Home Savings Bank

Citation236 U.S. 101,59 L.Ed. 485,35 S.Ct. 265
Decision Date25 January 1915
Docket NumberNo. 126,126
PartiesBOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF THE CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, Petitioner, v. HOME SAVINGS BANK
CourtUnited States Supreme Court

Messrs. Charles R. Brock, William H. Ferguson, I. N. Stevens, Milton Smith, Charles S. Thomas, and William H. Bryant for petitioner.

[Argument of Counsel from pages 101-103 intentionally omitted] Messrs. John Maxey Zane, Charles W. Waterman, and Charles F. Morse for respondent.

Mr. Justice Holmes delivered the opinion of the court:

This is an action brought by the respondent upon a certificate of indebtedness and an interest coupon attached to the same, against the petitioner. There was a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff and the circuit court of appeals affirmed the judgment. 118 C. C. A. 256, 200 Fed. 28. The plaintiff held the instrument by indorsement, and was found to have purchased it in good faith before maturity, but the defendant denied the authority to issue the certificate in negotiable form, and sought to raise the question by its third defense, which set up failure of consideration. There was a demurrer to this defense, which was sustained by the circuit court, and the trial took place upon the other issues. The circuit court of appeals declined to consider the correctness of this ruling because no exception was taken to it. But no exception or bill of exceptions is necessary to open a question of law already apparent on the record, and there is nothing in the record that indicates a waiver of the defendant's rights. Therefore we must consider the merits of the defense. Nalle v. Oyster, 230 U. S. 165, 57 L. ed. 1439, 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 1043.

The certificate recites the allowance of a claim for ballot machines by the board of county commissioners of the city and county of Denver, and goes on, 'the board of county commissioners being authorized thereto by the laws of the state of Colorado, act of 1905, hereby issues its certificate of indebtedness for the said sum, and will in one (1) year pay to the order of the Federal Ballot Machine Company the sum of $11,250, with interest on this sum, from the date hereof, at the rate of 5 per cent per annum; the said interest payable semiannually, as per two (2) coupons, hereto attached.' This certificate was one of ten issued to provide for the payment for ballot machines, and the Constitution of the state authorized provision for payment in such case 'by the issuance of interest-bearing bonds, certificates of indebtedness, or other obligations, which shall be a charge upon such city, city and county, or town; such bonds, certificates, or other obligations may be made payable at such time or times, not exceeding ten years from the date of issue, as may be determined, but shall not be issued or sold at less than par.' Art. 7, § 8, as amended November 6, 1906. A statute in like words previously had been passed, to be effective if the amendment to the Constitution should be adopted, as it was. Laws of 1905,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
32 cases
  • Fleischmann Const Co v. United States Forsberg, 50
    • United States
    • U.S. Supreme Court
    • March 1, 1926
    ...147 U. S. 647, 652, 37 L. Ed. 316; Nalle v. Oyster, 33 S. Ct. 1043, 230 U. S. 165, 174, 57 L. Ed. 1439; Denver v. Home Savings Bank, 35 S. Ct. 265, 236 U. S. 101, 104, 59 L. Ed. 485; Harper v. Cunningham, 8 App. D. C. 430, The demurrers to the original declaration and petitions were based u......
  • State Ex Rel. Richards v. Moorer
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • October 12, 1929
    ...but name should be deemed to be bonds within the meaning of the constitutional limitations. See, also, Denver v. Home Savings Bank, 236 U. S. 101, 35 S. Ct. 265, 59 L. Ed. 485. "In one of the cases (Lillard v. Melton) the obligations were secured by the income of a canal company. In three o......
  • Evans v. Beattie
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • October 18, 1926
    ... ... by certain taxpayers, residents of the county ... of Florence, in the original jurisdiction of ... commission, and the board of coastal highway commissioners ... (appointed ... of Pocotaligo, in Beaufort county, to the city" of ... Beaufort, 23 miles ...         \xC2" ... See, also, Denver v. Home Savings Bank, 236 U.S ... 101, 35 ... ...
  • Board of Public Instruction, Putnam County v. Wright
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • January 7, 1955
    ...bonds will be inferred and construed.' Jones, supra, Vol. I, section 286; Board of County Commissioners of City and County of Denver v. Home Savings Bank, 236 U.S. 101, 35 S.Ct. 265, 59 L.Ed. 485. In further support of their contention it is argued by the Board that the high school bonds is......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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