682 FEDERAL REPORTER. �state at least 15 days before it should become due, or satis- factory evidence be produced that it iiad been paid or provided for; and (3) that the principal of the bonds should be paid by the company by means of a sinking fund in the state treasury, created by the purchase and deposit therein of Ten- nessee interest-bearing bonds, supposed to be adequate for the purpose of enabling the state to meet its bonds at maturity. �There is nothing in any of these stipulations out of which the relation of the state to the bond holder is changed from that of a principal debtor to a surety ; nor does it appear how the company beeomes debtor to the bond holder in any degree whatever. There is no express promise on its part to the bond holder, nor is any contract relation implied between him and the company. Section 3 oontains no language im- porting such promise. It declares merely that the state of Tennessee shall be invested with a lien for the payment of the bonds by the company. The state imposes the lien if its aid is accepted and as a condition of the grant. The language may imply a promise by the company accepting the aid to pay the state, but there is no obligation of the company to pay the bond holder resulting either from positive law or from contract express or implied. �The lien was clearly "reserved in favor of the state." It was the state of Tennessee that, upon the issuance of the bonds, was invested with the lien or mortgage without deed. No other lien could have priority over or corne in conflict with the lien of the state. The company was to deposit the inter- est money and exchange with the state's fiscal agent at least 15 days before it became due, or satisfactory evidence that the interest had been paid or provided for. Ail the suits and proceedings under the act are given as remedies exolusively to the state. The state might have a decree and sell the road for non-payment of any bond. The bond was made by the Btate for the accommodation of the railway company, and was sold in open market, without any promise by the com- pany other than what is implied to the state by accepting the benefit of the act. �There is no express declaration of trust on the part of the ����
