Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 4.djvu/396

 382 FEDEBi.Ii BEPOBTEB< �TJnder chapter 307, Laws 1864, in the month of June, 1864, a petition was made and presentee for a special elec- tion to be held in the several towns of St. Croix county, to vote on the proposition for railroad aid to the amount of $25,000. A meeting -w&a held, pursuant to call, and a vote laken, which resulted in a majority vote in favor of such aid. Afterwards, there being some supposed irregularity in the holding of the meeting and canvassing the votes, chapter 279, Laws 1865, was passed. The superviaors never issued the bonds as they were empowered to do by the second sec- tion of the.act of 1864; and the question is whether the transaction of the vote, in connection with the several stat- utes, and the fact that the road has been built, constitute a contract which the plaintiff has the right to have specifically performed. �I think the proper construction of section 2 of the act of 1864 is that it vests a discretion in the board of supervisera, after a favorable vote has been had, to cause to be issued bonds to an amount not exceeding $50,000. If the statute had authorized the people to vote the amount, and then pro- vided the board might issue the bonds for the amount so voted, perhaps it would be the duty of the board to issue the bonds, though the law were permissive. But, under this stat- ute, the people were only authorized to vote on the question of aid either "for or against." They were not authorized to vote any particular amount. If they voted for railroad aid, then the board of supervisors were empowered to determine the amount, not exceeding $50,000, and cause the bonds to be issued. ' ■ �It seems clear that the action of the board, in fixing the amount by resolution and authorizing the issue of the bonds, is an essential part of the machinery by which the aid can be given; that the law vests, a discretionary power, and that until the superyisors make their resolution there is ho con- tract. The supervisors, and not the people, are the usual •contracting power of the county, and it is not to be presurtied that the legislature intended to take this power from tîie board, unless such intention is clearly expressed. ����