FOBTSMOUTH SAV. BANK V. CITY OF SPBINGPIELD. ^7| �and levy such taxes as might be necessary to raise the sutn of $200,000, and for the purchase of the tract of land whi(jh the city and county were required to convey to the state. , In pursuance of this law Bome of the bonds in this case were issued by the city of Springfleld, reciting that they were issued under this law, and for the purposes designated in the law. The only objection of any force against these bonds is that, as the law authorized the govemor to convey the particular lot of land called the state-house square to the county and city, and also authorized the county and the city to issue bonds, they have not been issued by the city and county jointly. It is true that the law might have been, and ought, perhaps, to have been, more specifie in relation to the, manner in which the bonds should be issued, but we have to take as it is and construe the law. Under the faets before the court it seems that the bonds in controversy here were issued by the city alone. Does that fact render this class of city bonds inop- erative ? I think not. There are many reasons why the con- struction which was given by the city and county authorities was proper, and such a construction as the statute warranted; There would undoubtedly be great difficulties and embarrass- ments connected with the issue and payment, by taxationor otherwise, of bonds given by the city and county jointly. They are separate and distinct corporations. True, the city is a corporation within the county of Sangamon, but in the administration of what are called governmental affairs, and nearly all of which concern the welfare of the people, th^ mayor and common council of the city have exclusive author- ity. The county bas no jurisdiction and controi over much which pertains to the welfare of the citizens of Springfield, so that it was not unnatural, I think, when this statute came to be considered by the citizens of the city and of the county,. that an arrangement should be made between them by which they should sever in the bonds which the law contemplated should be given, so that a separate distribution should be made. That it was, in fact, made, does not particularly ap- pear as to the f unds to be raisëd, although it is admitted that an amicable arrangement was made between the respective ����
