16 ·» FEDERAL nE1>0mEB.
will and sliallrissue to each railroad company or corporation, which
shall become entitled thereto, the bonds" of the state.
B These provisions of the act are conclusive upon _this question.
Under them the moment the award was made by the commissioners
it amounted to a concluded and irrevocable contract on the part of
the state to issue the bonds of the state to the company upon its
Bling the required vouchers. The award was made on the applica-
tion of ·the company, by the board of railroad commissioners, who
alone had: the power and authority to award the aid. When, as in
this_ case, the application of the company asked an award of aidfor
the w.hole line of the.c~omwpai5y*s road, and it wasawarded, their
t powers and duties, so far forth as related to that road,.were at an
end. ¥ The zprocess did not have to be repeated uponthe completion
of every 10 miles of road. The act did not contemplate theissue of
any bondsiat the time the aid was awarded; they were to be issued,
the Brstinstallment, when `10 miles ofthe road had beensconstructed,
and ia like installment upon the completion of each 10 miles there-
B after. · e ~ r ~ ,
~What the company was required to do after the award of the aid,
and before it receivedthe bonds from the governor, was to Ble cer-
tain"papers· and vouchers which could only be Bled after the award.
. There was no further contract to be made between the rcompanyand
the state. And upon Bling the requisite vouchers itwas made the
duty of the governor to issue and deliver to the company the bonds
of the state, according to the termsof the award._ No discretion was
vested in the governor. His power and duty to issue the bonds was
found in the award of the commissioners, and not in any new con-
tract. There was no convention between him and the company. He
had no powerto enter into any contract with the company. After
the company had qualified itself to receive the bonds, his duty was
merely ministerial, and was enjoined upon him in the most peremp-
tory terms by the sixth section of the act. A ministerial act is well
defined to be "one which a person performs in a given state of facts
in a prescribed manner, in obedience to the mandate of legal author-
ity, without regard to or the exercise of his own judgment upon the
propriety of the act being done." Floumoy v. City of Jefcrsonville,
17 Ind. 169. The duties devolved upon the governor fall exactly
within this deBnition. E
The proceeds of the bonds were to be used in building the roads,
and bythe third section of the act it was made the duty of the board