Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 5.djvu/280

 268 FEDERAL DEPORTER. �406; Gashell v. Dudley, 6 Met. 552; Ilunneman v. Fire Dis- trict, 37 Vt. 40, where a fire district, authorized to purchase an engine, was held to be a corporation; Angell & Ames on Corporations, §§ 77-79; Commissioner of Eoads v. McPherson, 1 Spear, (S. C.) 218; Governor v. Allen, 8 Humph. 176. �An examination of these authorities will show that it is only in cases where a hona fide contract cannot be otherwise enforced, that courts will hold that a corporation bas been created by implication. If the plaintiii could have no rem- edy whatever upon the bonds in suit, except by an action against the precinct, it would no doubt be held that he was entitled to that remedy. But we are clearly of the opinion that under the law by virtue of which the bonds were issued, and assuming that they are valid obligations, the plaintifi has a right of action against the county of Cuming, within the principles of the decision in Jordan v. Cass County, supra. An examination of that case will show that the statute under which the township bonds, therein considered, were issued, was substantially like the one now under consideration. It provided that "it shaU be the duty of the county court to make such subscription in helialf of such township." The statute of Kansas, under which plaintifi's bonds were issued, provided : "And the county commissioners shall issue special bonds for such precinct, and a tax to pay the same shall be levied upon the property within the bounds of such pre- cinct. " It is true that in the case of Jordan v. Gass County there was a statement on the face of the bonds that they were issued by the county court on behalf of the township. No such statement appears upon the face of the bonds in the present case, but this makes no difference, because that pro- vision appears in the statute which is referred to upon the face of the bonds, and is to be considered as if made a part thereof. �The bonds, then, although voted by the inhabitants of the precinct, and to be paid by tax levied upon the property within the precinct, are issued by the proper officers of the county, and are, in legal effect, bonds of the county. The plaintiff's remedy is by suit ag:iinst the county; his judg- ����