LONG V. CITY OP NEW LONDON. 567 �We are not unmindful of the decision of the supreme court of this state in Poster v. Kenosha, 12 Wis. 688, and in Fisk T. Kenosha, 26 Wis. 23. In those cases it was held that the legislature cannot confer upon a municipal corporation an unlimited power to levy taxes and raise money, aside from and above what may be necessary and proper for legitimat© purposes, the grant of such unlimited power being inconsist- ant with section 3 of article 11 of the constitution; and it may be difEcult to reconcile some of the reasoning of the «ourt in these cases with that of the courts in the Ohio and Michigan cases cited. But it is to be remarked of Poster v. Kenosha and Pisk v. The Same that the statute there under consideration authorized the unlimited levy of taxes for any purpose which might "be considered essential to promote or secure the common interest of the city;" and this feature of ihe statute is much dwelt upon in the opinion of the court in Poster V. Kenosha. The grant of power to leyy taxes was Absolutely unlimited, both as to amount and object, and the -court held that the legislature could not confer upon a munic- ipal corporation "such unrestrained ability to contraot cor- porate indebtedness and mortgage the real estate of the city." �We are not prepared to hold that there is such similarity between the statute passed upon in Poster v. Kenosha and Pisk V. Kenosha and that under consideration in the case at bar, as to make those cases controlling upon the question here involved. The enabling act of 1867 was, in our opinion, a valid enactment, and conferred upon the village of New London authority and right tp issue the bonds in suit ; and ihe demurrer to the complaint wili, therefore, be overruled. �Deummond, 0. J., concurred. ����
