
    Wyandotte & Kansas City Bridge Company v. The City of Wyandotte.
    [The principles of law enunciated in-the case of the Wyandotte & Kansas Oity Bridge Company v. The Board of County Commissioners of Wyandotte county, ante, p. 326, reaffirmed.]
    
      Error from Wyandotte District Court.
    
    Injunction, brought by the Bridge Company to enjoin “the City of Wyandotte, its officers, servants and agents’from levying any tax upon the taxable property of said city” to-pay certain “bonds, coupons, or any part thereof,” etc. An election was held in said city of Wyandotte on the 13th of May 1871, at which the proposition “to issue the bonds of said city to the amount of $25,000 to aid in the construction of a free bridge across the Kansas,” was submitted, and a majority of the votes cast thereat were in favor of said proposition. The petition stated substantially the same facts as the petition of the same plaintiff in the action against the Commissioners of Wyandotte County, (ante, p. 326,) • and further averred—
    “That no ordinance was ever passed by the council of said city providing for the building of a bridge across the Kansas river; nor that the said city should aid in the building of such bridge; nor to submit to a vote of the voters of said city any proposition to build such bridge, or aid in building the same, nor to issue bonds for any such purpose. * * * That said city has issued its bonds or is about to cause its bonds to be issued to the amount of $25,000, * * * and to deliver the same to the said King Iron-Bridge Co., in part payment for building said bridge, and in part fulfillment of said contract of said board of county commmissioners with said company, or to deliver said bonds to said board for the purpose of applying the same or the avails thereof in fulfillment of said contract of said board. That said bonds have been issued or are about to be issued as aforesaid under color off the aforesaid resolution of said council, and said vote, and upon no other authority. And the plaintiff further says that the defendants threaten, intend to, and if not restrained will levy upon said city, taxes to pay the interest of said bonds as it falls due from time to time, and to pay the principal at maturity.”
    The city demurred to the petition. The case was heard on the demurrer, at the June Term 1872. The district court sustained the demurrer, and the plaintiff brings the case here on error.
    
      Nelson Cobb, and E. W. Kimball, for plaintiff.
    
      J. B. Scroggs, for defendant in error.
   The opinion of the court was delivered by

Valentine, J.:

This case involves the same questions of law as we have just decided in the case of the Wyandotte & Kansas City Bridge Company v. The Board of County Commissioners of Wyandotte County, ante, 326, 329. And without entering into details in the case, we would say that we reaffirm all the principles of law enunciated in that case. The order and judgment of the court below are affirmed.

All the Justices concurring.  