OSBORNE
v.
COUNTY OF ADAMS
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Supreme Court held that a steam grist-mill does not constitute a "work of internal improvement" under Nebraska's 1869 statute authorizing counties and precincts to issue bonds for railroads and internal improvements, and therefore bonds issued by Adams County to aid in constructing such a mill were unauthorized and void. The Court distinguished the case from Township of Burlington v. Beasley, where Kansas's statute explicitly mentioned "water-power" alongside internal improvements, allowing a reasonable interpretation to include steam grist-mills, whereas Nebraska's statute only specifically named railroads.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Justice Harlan delivered the opinion of the court.
A steam grist-mill is not, in our opinion, a work of internal improvement, within the meaning of the act of Nebraska approved Feb. 15, 1869, which authorizes counties, cities, and precincts of organized counties “ to issue bonds to aid in the construction of any railroad or other work of internal improvement.”
Township of Burlington v. Beasley, 94 U. S. 310, is not, as supposed by counsel, an authority for a different conclusion. That case arose under a statute of Kansas, which empowered municipal townships in that State to issue bonds “ for the purpose of building bridges, free or otherwise, or to aid in. the construction of railroads .or water-power, by donation thereto, or the taking of stock therein, or for other works of internal' improvement.” The bonds there in suit were issued to aid in the construction and completion of, and to furnish the motive power’ for, a steam custom grist-mill. It was held that the statute, reasonably interpreted, embraced a grist-mill operated by steam, as well as one run by water-power; that, since municipal aid was authorized for “the construction of . . . water-power,” the phrase “other works of internal improvement,” in the Kansas statute, might be fairly construed as embracing works of the same class, and consequently as embracing a steam grist-mill. The court was somewhat influenced, as plainly appears from its opinion, by decisions of the Supreme Court of Kansas, particularly that of Commissioners of Leavenworth County v. Miller, 7 Kan. 479.
The present case is different. The only work of internal improvement specially described in the Nebraska statute is a .railroad, and we are not justified by anything in Township of Burlington v. Beasley, or in the decisions of the courts of Nebraska, in holding that a steam or other kind of grist-mill is of the class of internal improvements which municipal townships in that State are empowered, by the statute in question, to aid by an issue of bonds.
For these reasons we adjudge that the bonds issued by the county commissioners in behalf of Juniata Precinct, in Adams County, Nebraska, in aid of the construction of a steam gristmill in that precinct, are unauthorized by the act of Feb. 15, 1869; andas authority for their issue is not claimed to exist under any other statute, they must be held to be without binding forcé against the precinct.
Judgment affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Osborne v. Adams Cnty., 109 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1883)
-
Cole v. La Grange, 113 U.S. 1 (U.S. 1885)…ey, 94 U. S. 310, the grist mill-held to be a work of internal improvement, to aid in construct ing which a town might issue bonds under the statutes of Kansas, was a public mill which ground for toll for all .customers. See Osborne v. Adams County, 106 U. S. 181, and 109 U. S. 1; Blair v. Cuming County, 111 U. S. 363. Subscriptions and bonds of. towns and cities, under legislative-authority, to aid in establishing railroads, have been sustained on the same ground on which the delegation to railroad corpora…
-
Blair v. Cuming Cnty., 111 U.S. 363 (U.S. 1884)…any decision of the highest court of Nebraska, made.before the plaintiff became, on January 1st, 1876, 'the bona fide owner of these coupons, or even since, holding in accordance with the contention of the defendant. In Osborne v. County of Adams, 106 U. S. 181, this court decided, in November, 1882, that, under the same statute that is in question here, bonds issued to aid in the construction of a steam grist-mill were not issued to aid in the construction óf a work of internal improvement. There was a su…
Authorities Cited
- Twp. of Burlington v. Beasley, 94 U.S. 310 (U.S. 1876)