282 FEDBBAL BEPOBTEB. �Btill, I do not think that that would render the re-issued bonds invalid. �I have not thought it necessary to take further time for the purpose of giving my general views in relation to the validity of these bonds. If I took more time, and looked into the case more fully, I might go more into detail than I bave; but the equity of the holders of these bonds does seem so strong that no court, unless under a sort of moral or legal compulsion, would feel inclined to say, under all the circumstances of this case, that these bonds were invalid. Having been issued for 80 long a time, the interest on them having been paid, and their validity having been recognized again and again in af ter years by the city authorities, it does seem as though it is too iate now, under all the circumstances of this case, for the city to question their validity. I therefore hold that they are valid, and the city is liable. It bas issued the bonds, obtained the money and the beneûts it bas conferred, and law and equity declare that the debt should be paid. ���Stbbbinb V. Thi Boabd of Codktt Commissionbbs of Pobblo �COUNTY. (Circuit Oourt, D. Colorado, , 1880.) �1. Btatdte CoNSTBtTDîa Btatutb — Whbn Valid. — A statute construîng �and ezplaining a prior statute ia valid, in go far, at least, as future transactions are concemed. �2, Statdtb — Raeleoad — Stock. — A statute authorizing counties to take �stock in railroads is applicable to a railroad dulj organized under a subsequent statute. �— — — , for plaintifF. , for defendant. ���MiLLEB, C. J. The case of Stebbîns against the board of county oommissioners is submitted, and at Judge Hallett's request I bave examined it, and pronounced the resuit. This is a suit on bonds issued by Pueblo county in aid of a rail- ����
