GAEBBTT V. CITY OP MEMÇHIS. 861 �the assets of said city, including its tax books and bills for past-due and unpaid taxes," and for an order "clothing him wïth ail proper powers to enable him to coUect the same." �This application was predicated on section 3 of the "Act to enable municipal corporations, baving more than 30,000 in- babitants, to settle their indebtedness," of the twenty-third of March, 1877, wbicb provides "tbat upon the application of any person or persons who are the owners of any past-due and unpaid bonds, coupons, or other indebtedness of a municipal corporation, not less in amount than $100,000, it shall be the duty of the chancery court to appoint a reeeiver for said municipal corporation, who, as the officer of the court, and not otherwise, should, under the order and instruction of the court, act for sueh municipal corporation." �Adopting substantially the language of this enactment, complainants charge that they "are the owners and holders of past-due and unpaid bonds and coupons and other indebt- edness of said city to the amount of more than $100,000," and that "on much of said indebtedness" they had recovered judgments and obtained writs of mandamus to compel pay- ment, etc. ; but "that the offieers of said city, whose duty it was to levy and collect the taxes assessed, in obedience to said mandamuseg, had failed to collect the same, and that the defendant had, through its offieers, constantly connived at said delinquency," thus bringing their case clearly within the provisions of said third section. But on the day succeed- ing the filing of complainant's bill, to-wit, on the twenty- ninth of January, 1879, and before any action was had thereon, the legislature passed two acts, — one to repeal the defendant's charter, and the other to organize the same pop- ulation and territory into another municipality by the corpo- rate name of "Taxing District." New, if the authority to levy and collect taxes for municipal purposes, usual in such charters, had been conf erred on the taxing district, the latter municipality might have been proceeded against as the suc- cessor of the former, and compelled to assess and collect taxes for the payment of complainant's judgment. But this point was thoughtfully guarded by the acts in question. The ����
