274 PBPRRAL BEPOETEB. �eral bridges in tiie county, the princii^al one being across tho Loup river. The county has had the f uU benefit of the bridge bonds. They were turned over directly to the parties who built the bridges, and were by them put on the market and into circulation, with the statement on their face that they had been properly voted for and issued. Good faith and common honesty require their payment wben found in the hands of innocent bona fide purchasers. The plaintiff must, therefore, have judgment on the coupons detached from the bridge bonds, with lawful interest thereon from the time the same became due and payable. ���Brown V. BoARD op CouiiXY Com'bs op Shesman Co. �(Circuit Court, D. Nebraslca. January 3, 1881.) �1. County Wabeants — Whbn Void — Nebeaska. — County warrants, isaued for the purpose of erecting a county court-house in the state of Nebraska, are void, where their issue was not authorized by a vote of the qualified eloctors of the county, and no beneflt whatever re- sulted to the county from the issuing of the said warrants.— [Ed. �Jury trial waived. Finding of facts. �It is found, from the pleadings and the testimony pro- duced in support thereof, that the couuty oiders in suit were issued by the county commissioners of Slierman county in part payment of the contract priee for building a court-house for the county; that the building of a court-house involved the extraordinary expenditare of monoy, and that no vote of the qualified electors of the county ever authorized the expend- iture of money or the issuing of the orders for any such purpose; that no court-house was built and accepted by the couuty, and no benefit whatever resulted to the county from the issuing of the said warrants ; that the warrants are not negotiable securities, and are void for want of proper author- ity to issue them. �G. S. Case and J. C. Cowin, for plaintiCE. �GroJ" e Switzer, for defendant. ����
