\
.36 FEDERAL REPORTER. _ l
. ‘ UNITED STATES v. Ounwar and others. ‘
` ._ 4 _ V (Circuit Ooart, D. Oregon. _`March 7, 1887.)
` DEADY, J. This case was argued and submitted with the foregoing one. It
~ is alleged in the complaint that` on May 1, 1883, and divers days since, the de- ‘
  `fendants cut and removed from the public lands of the United States, to-wit,
· the W ·} of section 13 of township SIN., of range 9 E. of the Wallamet merid-
ian, situate in Washin(gton“Territory, 600 trees, and out the same into cord-
. zwood, torwit, 3,000 cor s, of the value of $7,500, and wrongfulliy converted the
i . same t0.their_own use, to the damage of the plaintiff $7,500; hue defenses are c
` similar tothose made in the foregoing case, to·wit: Denials; _ a license from the
‘ Northern Pacitic Railway Company; and the cutting was done in good faith,
-;, IDI the second defense it is alleged that the premises are within the limits of
gre grant to the Northern Pacino on the line of its general route between
‘ ortland and Wallula junction, and that, acting under alicense from said
V corporation, they cut and removed from said half section not more than 1.800 r
. ; corgsof wood, of no greater value when standing in the tree than 10 cents a
cor ., »
` ~ The demurrer to the defenses of good faith is overruled, and sustained to
p that of license from the Northern Pacific. i —
Prmzcn and others v. TowN or ST. ANNE.;
> (Circuit court, JVC D. Illinois. January 31. .1887.) l
1.44PLEADING——SUlRPLUBAGE—INSUTFICIENT EVIDENCE SET OUT..
· T 1 ‘ Where, inan action on town bonds, the declarationsumciently avers the
. facts required by thestate constitution to validate the issuing of the bonds,
p A and the town clerk’s certiticate. of such facts, made a part of the complaint, is
insuiiicient, this insufiiciencyis not a ground of demurrer, since it is only evi-
· · dence of the facts pleaded, and mere surplusage. ’ ‘
2. SAME—PARTIES—LEGAL TrTLE. · —‘’·‘
, _ The declaration, showing that the plaintiffs were thelegal owners of the
bonds, is not demurrable by reason of the fact that it also shows that other
‘ - persons than the plaintiffs were the equitable owners of the bonds.
. At Law. A ` ·
. 17wmas S..M2:OZclZcmd, for plaintiff. · ·
I H. Loring, C. R. Starr, and Thomas P. Bonjicld, for defendant.
BI.onoETT, J ., (orally.) This is a suit to recover upon an alleged issue
of bonds by the defendant town to aid in the construction of the Chicago,
Danville & Vincennes Railroad, and defendant, by a demurrer to the
declaration, raises the question whether a cause of action is made out by
the declaration. The pleader has set out at length, not only the statutes
of Illinois, whereby it is claimed the town was empowered to issue the
bonds in question, but also the steps taken to call a town meeting to vote
upon the question of issuing thebonds, and the action of such meeting
sanctioning and authorizing such issue, with what seems to me ample
averments of the performance of all the conditions precedent required to
_ make a valid issue of bonds. The defendant. contends that, as the al-