Lyons v. Munson
ERROR to the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of New York.
This was an action brought by Edgar Munson upon three hundred and eighty-seven coupons or interest warrants originally attached to one hundred and twenty-nine bonds issued by the town of Lyons, Wayne County, New York, for $1,000 each, in payment of its subscription to the Sodus Bay, Corning, and New York Railroad Company, a corporation of that State, being the coupons for interest due respectively Oct. 1, 1872, and April 1 and Oct. 1, 1873, each for the sum of $35, payable to bearer at the Central National Bank of the city of New York.
Each bond bears date May 17, 1872, and recites that it was 'issued under the authority contained in chapter nine hundred and seven of the laws of 1869 of that State, and the amendments thereto, and under and pursuant to a judgment and determination of the county judge of Wayne County, dated May 17, 1872, duly rendered and entered of record under and pursuant to a petition of the tax-payers of said town, praying that said town issue its bonds to the amount of $150,000, and invest the same in the capital stock of that company; and at the foot of each of them is the following certificate, viz.:--
'WAYNE COUNTY, ss.:-Registered in the county clerk's office.
'In witness whereof, the clerk of Wayne County has hereto set his hand and affixed his seal of office.
[L. S.] 'ALFRED F. REDFIELD, Clerk.'
The defence relied on was that the plaintiff was not a bona fide holder of the coupons for value, and that the petition presented to the county judge was rendered illegal and void by containing a condition, in these words: 'Provided that the terminus of said road is made at Nicholas Point, on Sodus Bay, in the town of Huron;' and a qualifying clause, in these words: 'It is understood that the stock so to be taken is to embrace and include the stock now already subscribed and taken by persons residing in the said town of Lyons, amounting to the sum of $16,400;' and that by reason of the insufficiency and illegality of the petition, the county judge had no authority or jurisdiction to render the judgment mentioned in the bonds, and that the same are void.
The jury, under the direction of the court, returned a verdict for the amount of the coupons, with interest. The questions of law were reserved for consideration upon the motion of the plaintiff for judgment on the verdict. After argument, judgment was rendered in his favor.
The defendant thereupon sued out this writ.
Mr. H. L. Comstock for the plaintiff in error.
Mr. W. F. Cogswell, contra.
MR. JUSTICE SWAYNE delivered the opinion of the court.