Gelpcke Vs. City of Dubuque

Gelpcke vs City of Dubuque

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided 1863

~3 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/81161

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/81161
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: 1863
Case Number: 68 U.S. 220
Subject: Land Acquisition

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Land Acquisition

Key legal issue: Land Acquisition

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Gelpcke

Respondent

City of Dubuque

Excerpt

.....(whose charter gave it power to borrow money for public purposes), had power to subscribe to the stock and to issue its bonds in payment, and makes the subscription and bonds as valid as if authorized by the statute directly. this suit differed from 80 -- the principal one -- only in the fact that the bonds of the city, which in this case bore date 1st september, 1855, were issued prior to the passage of the act of 28th january, 1857, specially authorizing the city to subscribe to the railroads for which the bonds in no. 80 had been subsequently given. the bonds rested in this case (no. 81), therefore, on the charter of the city (approved february 24, 1847), authorizing it "to borrow money for public purposes, " and on an act passed 25th january, 1855, before the bonds were issued, one section of page 68 u. s. 221 which enacted that whenever "any company shall have received, or may hereafter receive, the bonds of any city or county upon subscription of stock by such city or county, such bonds may bear an interest at a rate not exceeding ten percent, and may be sold by the company at such discount as may be deemed expedient," and which enacted also (§ 3), that "the provisions of this act shall apply to any railroad bonds which have been heretofore issued, as well as to those which may hereafter be issued." mr. justice swayne, after stating the difference between the case and no. 80, and quoting this act, thus delivered the opinion of the court: "in this act it is clearly implied that cities have authority to subscribe for railroad stock, and to issue their bonds in payment of it. what is implied in a statute is as much a part of it as what is expressed. ( united states v. babbitt, 1 black 61.) considering the subject in the light of these acts, we entertain no doubt that the city possessed the power to issue these bonds." judgment reversed and case remanded.

Full Judgment

Gelpcke v. City of Dubuque - 68 U.S. 220 (1863)
U.S. Supreme Court Gelpcke v. City of Dubuque, 68 U.S. 1 Wall. 220 220 (1863)

Gelpcke v. City of Dubuque

68 U.S. (1 Wall.) 220

ERROR TO THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE

UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF IOWA

SYLLABUS

A statute which enacts that whenever any railroad company

"shall have received or may hereafter receive the bonds of any city or county upon subscriptions of stock by such city or county, such bonds may bear an interest "

at a rate specified, and " may be sold by the company," in a way mentioned -- implies that a city (whose charter gave it power to borrow money for public purposes), had power to subscribe to the stock and to issue its bonds in payment, and makes the subscription and bonds as valid as if authorized by the statute directly.

This suit differed from 80 -- the principal one -- only in the fact that the bonds of the city, which in this case bore date 1st September, 1855, were issued prior to the passage of the act of 28th January, 1857, specially authorizing the city to subscribe to the railroads for which the bonds in No. 80 had been subsequently given. The bonds rested in this case (No. 81), therefore, on the charter of the city (approved February 24, 1847), authorizing it "to borrow money for public purposes, " and on an act passed 25th January, 1855, before the bonds were issued, one section of

Page 68 U. S. 221

which enacted that whenever

"any company shall have received, or may hereafter receive, the bonds of any city or county upon subscription of stock by such city or county, such bonds may bear an interest at a rate not exceeding ten percent, and may be sold by the company at such discount as may be deemed expedient,"

and which enacted also (§ 3), that "the provisions of this act shall apply to any railroad bonds which have been heretofore issued, as well as to those which may hereafter be issued."

MR. JUSTICE SWAYNE, after stating the difference between the case and No. 80, and quoting this act, thus delivered the opinion of the Court:

"In this act it is clearly implied that cities have authority to subscribe for railroad stock, and to issue their bonds in payment of it. What is implied in a statute is as much a part of it as what is expressed. ( United States v. Babbitt, 1 Black 61.) Considering the subject in the light of these acts, we entertain no doubt that the city possessed the power to issue these bonds."

Judgment reversed and case remanded.

Same Parties Gelpcke vs City of Dubuque Same Subject Land Acquisition