TOMPKINS .1:. LITTLE noo: a rr. s. nr. _ 2—1
— " This bond is one of aseries, issued in aid of the Jacksonville, Pensacola Sc
Mobile Railroad Company, to the extent of $16,000 per mile upon completed
road; the state of Florida holding the iirst-mortgage bonds of said railroad °
company for a like amount, as further security to the holder hereof."
In the case at bar the bonds are payable to "the Little Bock dz
Fort Smith Railroad Company. or bearer," and they contain on their
face this recital: A
·· Issued in pursuance of an act of the general assembly of the state of Ar-
kansas, approved July 21, 1868, entitled *An act to aid in the construction
of railroads,’ the said act having been submitted to and duly ratified by the -
people of the state at the general election held November 3, 1868." ‘ `
In the Floridacase the supreme court said (page 139) that "the cer-
tificate of the governor, as to the security held by the state, is, inle-
gal effect, the certificate of the company itself, and is equivalent to
an engagement on the part of the company that the bond, so far as
the security is concerned, ·is> the valid obligation of the state. The
case is clearly within the reason of the rule which rnakessevery in- _
dorser of commercial paper the guarantor of the genuineness of} the
instrument he indorses. We cannot doubt that, under these circum-
stances, the company is estopped, so far as its own liabilitiesiare con-
cerned, from denying the validity of the bonds. -Having-~ negotiated
them onthe faith of such a certificate, the company must be heldto
have agreed, as part of its own contract, whatever that was, that the
bonds were obligatory." These cbservations of the court gare appli-
cable to the caseiat bar; If the recitalsin the bonds intthelonenase,
and the igovernorscertificate in, the other, are contrasted, the supe-
·rior force and strength of the former, for the purpose of creating an
estoppel against the company, cannot escape attention. 3 , 3i_,-1
, · By negotiating bonds payable to itself with thisrecital, the com-
pany must be held__to have represented. that they were issued under
a yalid act_of the general assembly, and, that the proposition, con-
tained in the act to loan, the credit; of the ,state,to the railroadicom-
panies had "been submi.tted§to and duly ratined bythe;people1of
the state." · Theirecital, inlegal effect,; makes the act a part of,the
bond.} ·The extract {from the opinion ofathe supreme court aonthis r
point is and answer torthe.,argum911t»of the learned counsel for the
_defendant-.·,that thepurchasers, of the bonds had__no right torely on _
the miaisl they. contained, _as against the company,,-and that the
latterwas notestoppedvto deny their truth., ¤     .-., , .. ».
The authorities cited by counsel to supporthis contentioniare, the
familiar ones that neither the state nor any other public corporation