City of Dawson v. Columbia Ave. Saving-Fund, Safe-Deposit, Title & Trust Co.
Decision Date | 01 May 1900 |
Docket Number | 879. |
Citation | 102 F. 200 |
Parties | CITY OF DAWSON et al. v. COLUMBIA AVE. SAVING-FUND, SAFE-DEPOSIT, TITLE & TRUST CO. |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Fifth Circuit |
The bill in this case was filed by the appellee, a corporation organized under the laws of Pennsylvania, as trustee for the holders of 80 first mortgage bonds, of $500 each, issued by the Dawson Waterworks Company, a Georgia corporation, against the city of Dawson, Ga., and the said Dawson Waterworks Company. The mayor, aldermen, and marshal, all citizens of Georgia, are formally made defendants. It is shown by the record that the city council of the city of Dawson on the 21st day of February, 1890, passed an ordinance by which it granted to R. L. Bennett, of Philadelphia, Pa and his associates, their successors and assigns, who were required to organize a company to be styled the Dawson Waterworks Company, the exclusive right and privilege, for the period of 99 years, of constructing, maintaining, and operating a system of waterworks. In compliance with the requirement of the ordinance, Bennett organized, under the laws of Georgia, a corporation known and designated as the Dawson Waterworks Company. The ordinance of February 21 1890, or so much thereof as it is deemed necessary here to insert, provided as follows:
* * *
For the purpose of obtaining money to construct the waterworks, the waterworks company thereafter issued 80 first mortgage bonds of $500 each, aggregating $40,000, and, to secure their payment, executed to the appellee, as trustee for the holders of the bonds, a mortgage on all its property, franchises, and privileges, and authorized the trustee to collect all amounts to become due by the city of Dawson for water rentals. The city of Dawson, by a resolution of its council duly passed, recognized the right of the appellee, as trustee, 'to demand, receive, and collect from the city of Dawson any and all sums of money that may be now due or that may hereafter become due under the aforesaid contract. ' It also appears that, pursuant to its contract with the city, the waterworks company constructed a system of waterworks, and has up to the present time supplied the city and the inhabitants with water. For the water thus supplied the city has paid the waterworks company the amount due under the contract, to wit, $2,000 per annum, up to the 1st day of January, 1895, when it refused to make further payments upon the ground that the contract was void, and upon the further ground that the waterworks company had failed to supply the quantity of water required of it by the terms of its contract. The city based its claim on the invalidity of the contract upon the decision of the supreme court of Georgia rendered in the case of City of Dawson v. Dawson Waterworks Co., 106 Ga. 696, 32 S.E. 907. Although the city paid, as before stated, the...
To continue reading
Request your trial- Columbia Ave Savings Fund, Safe Deposit, Title & Trust Co. v. City of Dawson
-
American Sugar Refining Co. v. City of New Orleans
...C.C.A. 635, and City of Dawson v. Columbia Avenue Saving Fund, Safe-Deposit, Title & Trust Co. (heretofore decided in this court) 42 C.C.A. 258, 102 F. 200. The writ of herein is dismissed, with costs, but without prejudice to any right the parties may have to sue out a writ of error from t......
-
Ex parte Jacobi
... ... Life Ins. Co. v. City of Austin, 168 U.S. 685, 18 ... Sup.Ct. 223, 42 ... C.C.A. 262, 60 F. 781; and City of Dawson v ... Columbia Ave. Saving-Fund, Safe-Deposit, Title & Trust ... Co., 42 C.C.A. 258, 102 F. 200, and ... ...
-
Higginson v. Chicago, B. & Q.R. Co.
... ... it should have acted differently. City of Newton v ... Levis, 49 U.S.App. 266, 25 ... ...