Wells v. Supervisors

Decision Date01 October 1880
Citation102 U.S. 625,26 L.Ed. 122
PartiesWELLS v. SUPERVISORS
CourtU.S. Supreme Court

ERROR to the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Mississippi.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the court.

Mr. George Perkins for the plaintiff in error.

Mr. Van H. Manning, contra.

MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the court.

On the 10th of March, 1852, the legislature of Mississippi passed an act to incorporate the Mississippi Central Railroad Company. Sects. 17 and 18 of that act are as follows:——

'SECT. 17. Be it further enacted, that the boards of police of the several counties of Madison, Holmes, Carroll, Yallabusha, Lafayette, and Marshall, together with such other counties as are adjoining or adjacent to the counties through which said railroad may pass, may for their respective counties subscribe for capital stock in said railroad, not to exceed in amount two hundred thousand dollars for any one county: Provided, however, that an election shall be holden in the county for and on account of which said stock is proposed to be subscribed, by the qualified electors thereof, at the regular precincts of said county, ten days' notice of the time of holding such election, and of the amount proposed to be subscribed, being first given by the board of police; and if at such election a majority of the qualified electors voting shall be in favor of such subscription, then said board shall make such subscription for and in behalf of the county for the amount specified; but if a majority of those voting shall be opposed to such subscription, the same shall not be made.

'SECT. 18. Be it further enacted, that said several boards of police, either before or after any election held as provided in the seventeenth section of this act, may direct, that whenever any tax shall be collected in their respective counties for the payment of the capital stock so subscribed by the county, which tax the several boards of police are hereby authorized to assess and collect from the taxable property or real property of the county as said board may elect; that the sheriff or tax-collector shall issue to the person paying such tax a certificate specifying the amount of tax so paid, and on account of what railroad the same is paid, which said certificate or certificates shall be transferable by indorsement; and whenever any person, either by payment of taxes as aforesaid, or by indorsement as aforesaid, shall hold a certificate or certificates, in amount equal to one or more shares of the capital stock of said railroad company, he may present the same to the treasurer of said company, who shall thereupon take up the said certificate or certificates and issue to the holder of them certificates for one or more shares of stock in said company, and such holder of said certificate of stock shall be for such stock substituted to the right of the county as a stockholder to the number of shares named in said certificate.'

On the 19th of April, and during the same session of the legislature, a supplemental act was passed, by which, if the act should be approved by a vote of the several counties through which the road might be located, a tax of five per cent on the assessed value of all lands lying within five miles, and two and one half per cent on all lying over five miles and under ten, of the road, was to be collected annually for a term of four years to aid in the construction of the road. Sect. 4 of this act is as follows:——

'SECT. 4. Be it further enacted, that whenever any sheriff or tax-collector shall collect any tax by virtue of this act, he shall give to the person or persons paying the same a certificate therefor, which certificate shall be transferable by indorsement; and whenever any person or persons, either by payment of taxes as aforesaid, or by indorsement as aforesaid, shall hold a certificate or certificates in amount equal to a share of the capital stock of said railroad company, he may present the same to the treasurer of said company, who shall thereupon take up the said certificate or certificates, and issue to the holder of them a certificate for a share of stock in said company, which certificate shall entitle such person to all the rights and privileges of a stockholder in said railroad company.'

On the 23d of November, 1859, the Memphis, Holly Springs, and Mobile Railroad Company was incorporated. Sect. 7 of that act of incorporation gave authority to the board of directors 'to issue, sell, negotiate, mortgage, pledge, or hypothecate the bonds or notes of the company, as well as any notes, bonds, scrip, certificates, or other property for the payment of money, or other property which said company shall or may receive as donations, or in payment of subscriptions to the capital stock of said company, or other dues thereto.' Sect. 8 provided that the board of directors might require each subscriber, at the time of subscribing, or at any time thereafter, to pay a part, not exceeding ten per cent, of his subscription to the capital stock in cash, and that no further payment should be demanded until in the opinion of the board a sufficient amount of the capital stock had been subscribed, with the means and credits of the company, to construct the road. No calls were to be made except on thirty days' notice, and the amount called for at any one time could not exceed thirty per cent to each subscriber of the amount of his subscription. Sect. 15 is as follows:——

'SECT. 15. Be it further enacted, that the sects. 17 and 18 of an act passed by the legislature of this State, and approved March 10, 1852, entitled 'An Act to incorporate the Mississippi Central Railroad Company,' regulating county subscriptions to the capital stock of said company, be, and the same are, adopted as part of this act, so far as the provisions of the same may be applicable.'

By sect. 16 the company was authorized to consolidate with other railroad companies.

No organization is shown to have been perfected under this act, and, Feb. 20, 1867, another act was passed, of which the title and the only portion pertinent to this case are as follow:——

'An Act to revive and amend an Act entitled 'An Act to incorporate the Memphis and Holly Springs and Mobile Railroad Company,' approved Nov. 23, 1859, and for other Purposes.

'SECT. 1. Be it enacted by the legislature of the State of Mississippi, that the above-recited act be, and the same is hereby, revived, and that the style of said railroad company shall hereafter be known as the 'Memphis, Holly Springs, Okolona, and Selma Railroad Company;' and, as many of the original incorporators are now dead, that N. B. Forrest' [&c.] 'all of the State of Mississippi, together with those who may hereafter become stockholders, their successors, &c., shall be said corporators.

'SECT. 2. Be it further enacted, that said company shall have sixteen years in which to construct the said road, and shall commence the same in three years from and after the passage of this act.'

When these several acts were passed, the Constitution of Mississippi, adopted in 1832, was in force. This constitution contained no limitation on the power of the legislature to authorize counties to become stockholders in, or to lend their credit to, railway or other corporations. A new constitution went into effect in 1868, art. 12, sect. 14, of which is as follows:——

'The legislature shall not authorize any county, city, or town to become a stockholder in, or lend its credit to, any company, association, or corporation, unless two-thirds of the qualified voters of such county, city, or town, at a special election, or regular election, to be held therein, shall assent thereto.'

At a special election held for that purpose on the 20th of November, 1869, the people of the county voted a subscription to the capital stock of the Memphis, Holly Springs, Okolona, and Selma company, and on the 21st of July, 1870, the name of the company was changed by a special act of the legislature to the Selma, Marion, and Memphis Railroad Company.

On the 19th of April, 1872, a general act was passed 'to authorize counties, cities, and towns to subscribe to the capital stock of railroads,' which gave any county through which any railroad should pass authority to subscribe any sum to the capital stock, if two-thirds of the legal voters should give their assent in the manner specially provided for. Such subscriptions were to be paid in the twenty-year coupon bonds of the county, bearing interest at the rate of seven per cent per annum. Taxes were to be levied and collected to pay the principal and...

To continue reading

Request your trial
38 cases
  • I IS Ljo State v. County Court Op Wirt County.
    • United States
    • West Virginia Supreme Court
    • April 1, 1893
    ...133 U. S. 527; 13 Bush 101; 3 Kan. 104; 115 U. S. 384; 117 U. S. 657; Const. (1863) Art. IV. s. 36; Acts 1864, c. 32; Acts 1866, c. 122; 102 U. S. 625; 111 U. S. 400; 127 U. S. 160; 121 U. S. 165; Id. 172; Acts 1863, c. 78, s. 9; 95 111. 368; 3 W. Va. 588; 8 W. Va. 74; Id., 612; 1 Cent. Rep......
  • First Nat. Bank v. Obion County
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Tennessee
    • October 28, 1924
    ...Anthony v. Jasper County, 101 U. S. 693, 25 L. Ed. 1005; Buchanan v. Litchfield, 102 U. S. 287, 291, 26 L. Ed. 138; Wells v. Pontotoc County, 102 U. S. 625, 26 L. Ed. 122; Bonham v. Needles, 103 U. S. 648, 651, 26 L. Ed. 451; School Dist. v. Stone, 106 U. S. 183, 1 S. Ct. 84, 27 L. Ed. 90; ......
  • Sluder v. St. Louis Transit Co.
    • United States
    • Missouri Supreme Court
    • June 1, 1905
    ...a negative that it shall not be done otherwise." Ex parte Joffee, 46 Mo. App. 360; Sutherland, St. Const. § 140; Wells v. Supervisors, 102 U. S. 625, 26 L. Ed. 122; Cooley's Const. Lim. pp. 78, 79, 93, 94. To the same effect is Elliott on Railroads, § 711. The same rule obtains in other jur......
  • State Ex Rel. Harrington v. City of Pompano
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • December 1, 1938
    ...); that the bonds of such corporations are void unless there be express or implied authority to issue them ( Wells v. Supervisors of Pontotoc County, 102 U.S. 625, 26 L.Ed. 122; Claiborne County Brooks, 111 U.S. 400, 4 S.Ct. 489 ; Concord v. Robinson, 121 U.S. 165, 7 S.Ct. 937 ; Kelley v. M......
  • 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