cretion, but to impose positive duty, and peremptory mandamus is properly issued to enforce levy of such tax, pp. 446, 447.

The following citing cases in the Federal courts affirm and rely upon this holding: Galena v. Amy, 5 Wall. 709, 18 L. 562, holding mandamus will lie to compel city council to levy tax to pay creditor; Riggs v. Johnson Co., 6 Wall. 194, 198, 18 L. 776, 777, holding power given town to levy local tax cannot be withdrawn until contract satisfied; Walkley v. Muscatine, 6 Wall. 483, 18 L. 931, holding mandamus proper method to compel tax levy to pay judgment against city; Supervisors v. Durant, 9 Wall. 417, 19 L. 733, holding mandamus proper remedy to enforce payment of judgment payable only by special tax; Heine v. Levee Commissioners, 19 Wall. 657, 22 L. 225, holding mandamus lies to compel corporation to levy tax to pay judgment; United States v. Dustin, 25 Fed. Cas. 946, holding "may" nearly synonymous with "must" in constitutional law; United States v. Sterling, 2 Biss. 411, F. C. 16,388, holding mandamus lies to enforce levy of tax authorized and necessary to pay debt; The California, 1 Sawy. 600, F. C. 2,313, holding statute saying commissioners may appoint secretary peremptory; United States v. Jefferson Co., 5 Dill. 323, 1 McCrary, 870, F. C. 15,472. holding Circuit Court must issue mandamus to officers to compel levy of tax; Sibley v. Mobile, 3 Woods, 540, F. C. 12,829, holding authority to levy tax carries duty to levy tax; Ex parte Parsons, 1 Hughes, 285, F. C. 10,774, holding mandamus lies to compel levy of tax where general levy insufficient; National Bank, etc. v. St. Joseph, 24 Blatchf. 438, 31 Fed. 217, holding permissive authority to pay off bonds carries duty of officers to do so; Ralston v. Crittenden, 3 McCrary, 349, 13 Fed. 512, holding permissive statutes deemed peremptory whenever individual rights call for exercise of power conferred; Woolridge v. McKenna, 8 Fed. 662, holding statute providing for filing of transcript directory as to time, but otherwise mandatory; United States v. De Visser, 10 Fed. 645, holding statutes directory as to customs officers become mandatory when individual rights are affected; New Orleans, etc. v. Merchant, 18 Fed. 848, holding postmaster-general has no authority to suspend action under statutes denying registered-letter privilege; United States v. Board of Auditors, 28 Fed. 409, holding town auditors cannot refuse to audit valid judgment against town; United States v. Judges, etc., 32 Fed. 715, holding power given county to levy tax to pay bonds continues until payment thereof; Provisional Municipality v. Lehman, 57 Fed. 332, 13 U. S. App. 411, holding statute authorizing conveyance of public lands to purchasers mandatory.

In the State courts the following apply the syllabus rule: Ex parte Chase, 43 Ala. 312, holding statute allowing change of venue to secure fair and impartial jury mandatory; Hayes v. County of Los Angeles, 99 Cal. 80, 33 Pac. 768, holding provision that supervisors may provide for refunding taxes paid more than once mandatory;

66

People v. Rio Grande County, 7 Colo. App. 237, 42 Pac. 1035, holding statute empowering levy of tax to pay judgment confers no discretion; Indianapolis v. McAvoy, 86 Ind. 590, holding provision that council "may refund amount erroneously assessed mandatory; Barber, etc., Co. v. Edgerton, 125 Ind. 461, 25 N. E. 437, holding failure to do thing required in grant of power to city invalidates proceedings; Rowell v. Williams, 29 Iowa, 215, holding city bound to keep in repair streets paved under statutory authority; Douglass v. Cline, 12 Bush, 651, holding chancellor must appoint receiver under code provisions in foreclosure proceeding; Darling v. Mayor, etc., of Baltimore, 51 Md. 15, holding mandamus will lie to compel levy of tax to pay judgment against county; Sifford v. Morrison, 63 Md. 18, holding order of Orphans' Court requiring of counter-security of executor not error; Bowen v. Minneapolis, 47 Minn. 117, 28 Am. St. Rep. 335, 49 N. W. 683, holding statute authorizing payment of money to certain persons, including plaintiff, mandatory; State v. Buffalo County, 6 Neb. 462, holding county officers bound to draw warrants for indebtedness where statute provides they may;" Munday v. Rahway, 43 N. J. L. 342, holding power granted city council to levy tax to pay debts must be exercised; Clark v. Elizabeth, 61 N. J. L. 582, 40 Atl. 622, holding mandatory authority given city council to estimate damages by changing grade of street; Delgado v. Chavez, 5 N. Mex. 648, 25 Pac. 948, holding mandamus properly issued to compel clerk to recognize one of claimants of office; People v. Supervisors of Otsego Co., 51 N. Y. 406, holding statute authorizing supervisors to examine assessments and repay amounts improperly assessed, mandatory: Erskine v. Nelson Co., 4 N. Dak. 75, 38 N. W. 351, 27 L. R. A. 704, and n., holding statute allowing treasurer to call in outstanding warrants mandatory on county commissioners; State v. Kent, 4 N. Dak. 591, 62 N. W. 636, 27 L. R. A. 692, holding statute providing that judge in felony trial may call in another judge mandatory; King Real Estate, etc. v. Portland, 23 Or. 201, 31 Pac. 482, holding "may" in statute construed shall" when public good or private rights require; Bell v. Caldwell, 107 Pa. St. 48, holding court must admit, as defendant in ejectment, party showing title consistent with defendant's; Galveston v. Posnainsky, 62 Tex. 129, holding city liable for injury received through failure to keep streets in repair; Voorhies v. Mayor, 70 Tex. 340, 7 S. W. 683, holding power of taxation must be exercised, when demanded by creditor, payable by special tax; Lenzen v. New Braunfels, 13 Tex. Civ. App. 351, 35 S. W. 349, holding city liable for loss by fire through failure of city to supply water; Leighton v. Maury, 76 Va. 870, holding, under statute, Circuit Court must grant liquor license to party fulfilling requirements; Vermont, etc., Co. v. Greer, 19 Wash. 613, 53 Pac. 1103, holding mandatory statute providing for allowance of attorneys' fees in suits on promissory note.

Cited also in valuable note in 9 Am. Dec. 283, 15 Am. Dec. 467, 18 Am. Dec. 240, 85 Am. Dec. 544, 545, 89 Am. Dec. 738, and 23 Am. St. Rep. 111. Approved in Barnes v. District of Columbia, 91 U. S. 551, 23 L. 443, holding city liable for negligence in case of streets; Thompson v. United States, 103 U. S. 483, 26 L. 523, holding proceedings in mandamus not abated by expiration of term of officers; United States v. Thoman, 156 U. S. 359, 39 L. 452, 15 S. Ct. 380, holding surplus of parish revenues may be applied where payment of debts is permissive; Iowa, etc., Co. v. County of Sac, 39 Iowa, 142, holding judgment conclusive of validity of warrants and right of supervisors to levy tax; Baldwin v. Letson, 6 Kan. App. 23, 49 Pac. 624, in dissenting opinion, majority holding president not bound to issue patent on Kickapoo Indian making proofs under treaty; Atlantic, etc., Co. v. Read, 50 N. J. L. 671, 672, 15 Atl. 13, dissenting opinion, majority holding authority to contract for water does not validate prior criminal arrangements for water; Ex parte Lowrie, 4 Utah, 179, 7 Pac. 494, holding defendant not tried as per statute not entitled to discharge on his own recognizance. See also Territory v. Nelson, 2 Wyo. 360, construing word may."

66

Distinguished in Baldwin v. Letson, 6 Kan. App. 19, 49 Pac. 622, holding president, under article 3 of Kickapoo treaty, not bound by determination of District Court; Hill v. Boston, 122 Mass. 350, 23 Am. Rep. 338, holding child cannot maintain action for injury against city for breach of duty under general law; State v. Board, etc., of Henry Co., 31 Ohio St. 214, holding mandamus will not lie to compel levy of tax authorized by special act.

4 Wall. 447-458, 18 L. 377, DAVIDSON v. LANIER.

Appeal and error.- Writ of error need not be allowed by judge, but must only be issued and served by copy lodged with clerk of court to which writ is directed, p. 453.

Cited and followed in Ex parte Virginia Commissioners, 112 U. S. 178, 28 L. 692, 5 S. Ct. 421, holding allowance of writ of error not required to review judgment of Circuit Court; Louisville, etc., Co. v. Stockton, 72 Fed. 2, 41 U. 8. App. 579, holding formal petition for writ of error unnecessary to give appellate court jurisdiction; Wilmington v. Ricaud, 90 Fed. 214, 61 U. S. App. 629, holding petition and order for writ of error not essential to give appellate court jurisdiction. Approved in Henning v. Western, etc., Co., 41 Fed. 867, holding court may enlarge time for filing motion for new trial; Dayton v. Lash, 94 U. S. 113, 24 L. 33, holding citation not being served, court may impose legal and proper conditions upon appellant.

Distinguished in Northwestern, etc., Co. v. Home, etc., Co., 154 U. S. 588, 20 L. 463, 14 S. Ct. 1168, holding writ of error to highest State court must be allowed.

Appeal and error.- What is clearly apparent as a mere clerical error in dating citation does not invalidate citation, p. 453.

Cited and followed in McClellan v. Pyeatt, 49 Fed. 260, 4 U. S. App. 98, holding court will not dismiss writ of error because of clerical defects in bond.

Appeal and error.- Writ and citation duly issued and served is not invalidated by another writ and citation issued, but not served, p. 453.

Appeal and error.- Court will prevent injury to rights of defendant in error by omission of judge to approve appeal bond in writing, which the statute does not in terms require. A writ of error is not a nullity because sufficient security is not given, p. 454. Cited and followed in Seward v. Corneau, 102 U. S. 162, 26 L. 86, holding insufficiency of bond, in not containing security for costs, does not avoid appeal; Providence, etc., Co. v. Wager, 37 Fed. 02, holding judge allowing appeal shall take security that appellant will prosecute appeal; Schenck v. Diamond, etc., Co., 73 Fed. 23, 39 U. S. App. 191, holding appeal unaffected by omission to give bond for costs at time of appeal; The Presto, 93 Fed. 524, holding mere fact that appellant is pauper does not dispense with bond for costs.

Distinguished in Vaill v. Town Council, 18 R. I. 410, 28 Atl. 346, holding appeal dismissable for failure to give bond prescribed by statute.

Statutes. In construing statute court must give effect to its obvious intention, if possible, without disregarding settled rules of interpretation, p. 454.

Banks and banking.- Tennessee statute for suppression of private banking covers with its prohibition all primary steps in establishing and putting bank into operation, and all transactions done in its operation and all devices for issuing currency from first to last step of its operations, and all contracts made in furtherance of such bank are invalid, p. 456.

Cited and followed in Cooper, etc., Co. v. Ferguson, 113 U. S. 733, 28 L. 1138, 5 S. Ct. 741, holding contract made by corporation in violation of State law unenforceable in State courts; Higgins v. McCrea, 116 U. S. 685, 29 L. 769, 6 S. Ct. 564, holding recovery on gambling contracts made in violation of Illinois statute cannot be had; McElvain v. Mudd, 44 Ala. 69, holding bonds issued to pay expenses of rebellion void; Lawson v. Muller, 44 Ala. 626, 4 Am. Rep. 150, holding note issued to ald War of Rebellion void; Lindsey v. Rottaken, 32 Ark. 633, holding city officers cannot issue small bills and notes prohibited by statute.

Bills and notes.- Delivery of bill of exchange indorsed and signed In blank authorizes receiver to fill it up in conformity with authority

given; but such bill cannot be enforced by one taking with knowledge that it was filled up without authority or in fraud, pp. 456, 457. Cited and followed in Toomer v. Rutland, 57 Ala. 386, 29 Am. Rep. 727, holding note signed in blank may be filled in only according to authority given. See valuable note in 11 Am. St. Rep. 316.

Bills and notes. The delivery of signature in blank is generally an authority to holder to fill it up as he thinks proper, p. 457.

Cited and followed in Snyder v. Van Doren, 46 Wis. 610, 32 Am. Rep. 744, 1 N. W. 290, holding delivery of blank note gives holder general authority to fill blanks.

Bills and notes. The sending of a blank bill to drawee by last indorser with consent of other indorsers and drawers, is presumably for acceptance and does not impliedly authorize drawee to fill in any amount on the bill and charge the parties therewith, p. 458.

Cited and relied upon in Cranson v. Goss, 107 Mass. 443, 9 Am. Rep. 48, holding note void between original parties, void in hands of one taking with notice. See valuable note in 12 Am. Dec. 293, and 11 Am. St. Rep. 317. Approved in Waldron v. Young, 9 Heisk. 782, holding surety delivering blank note to maker under limited authority liable to payee.

4 Wall. 459 463, 18 L. 433, BRADLEY v. PEOPLE.

Taxation. Under act of 1864, providing that State taxation on national bank shares shall not exceed tax on State bank shares, no tax is payable where the State taxes merely capital stock and not bank shares at all, p. 462.

Cited and followed in Austin v. The Aldermen, 7 Wall. 699, 19 L. 226, holding State cannot tax institutions created by general government for performance of constitutional functions; Farrington v. Tennessee, 95 U. S. 687, 24 L. 560, holding State may tax both capital stock and shares of bank organized under State law; Tennessee v. Whitworth, 117 U. S. 136, 29 L. 832, 6 S. Ct. 647, holding shares of bank stock taxable regardless of investment of capital stock in government securities; Palmer v. McMahon, 133 U. S. 667, 33 L. 775, 10 S. Ct. 326, holding investment of capital in government securities does not affect State taxation of stock; Owensboro, etc. v. Owensboro, 173 U. S. 679, 19 S. Ct. 541, holding franchise of national bank exempt from State taxation; In re Sheffield, 64 Fed. 836, holding exclusive right to manufacture under patent not subject to State taxation; Baldwin v. City Council, 53 Ala. 439, holding shares of national bank stock liable to State taxation; National, etc. V. Mayor, etc., 62 Ala. 295, 34 Am. Rep. 21, holding capital of national bank exempt from taxation by State; Linton v. Childs, 105 Ga. 572, 32 S. E. 619, holding president of national bank, as such, not liable to taxation by State; Kirtland v. Hotchkiss, 42 Conn. 438, 19 Am.