Municipal Corporation—Excess of Indebtedness Over Revenue—Construction of Constitution.—The inhibition of the constitution against the incurring of indebtedness or liability by a city “exceeding in any year the income’ and revenue provided for it for that year,” is to be naturally and reasonably construed as providing that all legitimate indebtedness of the municipality must not exceed all the revenues and income provided for that year.

Id.—Rights of Creditors—Contracts in Relation to Revende—Special Funds.—The creditors of a city have the right to contract with reference to its entire revenue, except in so far as the charter expressly otherwise provides in the case of special funds, such as the school or library fund.

Id.—Transferable Surplus in Special Funds—Validity of Indebtedness.—In determining the validity of a particular indebtedness incurred in any year, not only is the condition of the general fund and of any particular fund out of which such indebtedness is primarily payable to be considered, but also all surplus moneys remaining at the end of the fiscal year in other special funds, not primarily applicable thereto, which might lawfully be transferred to an applicable fund, after meeting all claims specially chargeable to such funds, must be taken into consideration.

Id.—Percentage of Tax Levy Named for Each Fund—Apportionment— Transfer of Surplus not Prohibited.—A provision in a city charter that “the percentage of each annual tax levy shall be named for each fund and the whole amount of taxes and revenue of the city apportioned to said several funds accordingly,” is not equivalent to the declaration of a purpose to limit any particular class of expenditure to the apportionment made for that class, and to prohibit the transfer of a surplus from one fund to reinforce another exhausted fund.

Id.—Exhausted Fund—Refusal to Transfer—Claim not Defeated.— A city cannot defeat a claim primarily payable out of an exhausted fund by refusal to transfer the surplus from another fund thereto, the transfer of which is not prohibited by its charter.

Id.—Subsequent Loss of Depositor’s Funds—Failure of Bank—Liabilities not Affected.—Moneys provided by the city for the revenue of a current year become part of its funds against which liabilities may accrue, and the validity of those liabilities cannot be affected by any subsequent loss caused by a deposit made in a bank, owing to the failure thereof and a final partial collection of the money.

Id.—Obder of Payment of Claims—Time of Account—Presentation.— In the absence of a provision in a city charter making the city liable in the order in which claims accrue against it, there is no priority of right among the claimants, except in the order of their presentation for immediate payment.

Id.—Construction of Charter—City Becoming “Owner” of Water Supply—Water Fund—Preferred Payments.—Under a city charter providing that when the city becomes “the owner of any water-supply” it shall establish a water fund, and make the salaries of the commissioners and the operating expenses of the water-plant payable before the monthly rental, the word “owner” Is to be construed, not in the sense of title, but in the sense of having control of a water supply.

Id.—Void Lease—Control of Plant—Legality of Fund and Payments—Claim "for Water Used.—The fact that the city held a void lease of a water plant, over which it exercised control, does not make the creation of a water fund and the making of preferred payments therefrom illegal or void as against a claim of the water company for the reasonable value of water used by the city.

Id.—Payment of Salary Out of General Fund.—The payment of the legal salary of a city justice out of the general fund, instead of out of the salary fund, is not an illegal payment which can be complained of by a water company in an action for the reasonable value of water used by the city.

Id.—Special Funds not Primarily Liable.—Neither the “street fund” nor the “street sprinkling fund” can he held primarily liable to the payment of a claim for the reasonable value of water used by the city, where there is no evidence that any of the water supplied by the plaintiff was used upon the streets, and the charter does not make those funds primarily liable for plaintiff’s claim.