
    The Steubenville & Indiana Railroad Company v. The Trustees of North Township, Harrison County.
    An act of the general assembly, authorizing the trustees of a township through which a railroad was to be made, to subscribe, on behalf of the township, to the capital stock of the railroad company, is not in conflict with the constitution of 1802.
    This case is essentially similar to that of The Cincinnati, Wilmington and Zanesville Eailroad Co. v. The Comm’rs of Clinton Co., and both causes were argued ^together. The only point made in the defense was that the law authorizing the subscription conflicted with the constitution of 1802. If there was no such conflict, the respondents were content that a peremptory mandamus should be awarded.
    
      Moodey, Henry Stafibery and Pugh, attorney general, for plaintiffs ; Peppard, for defendants.
   By the Court.

We see no difference in principle between a county and township subscription. We have decided the former to be binding in the case of The Cin. Wilm. and Zanes. R. R. Co. v. The Comm’rs of Clinton Co., and for the same reasons given in that case, we must hold the latter to be valid. A peremptory mandamus must bo issued.

Peremptory mandamus awarded.  