Northern Bank of Toledo v. Porter Township Trustees is a United States Supreme Court case that was decided in 1884. The case involved a dispute between the Northern Bank of Toledo and the Porter Township Trustees over the collection of taxes. The Northern Bank of Toledo had loaned money to the Porter Township Trustees and had taken a lien on the township's taxes as security for the loan. The township then attempted to collect taxes from the citizens of the township, but the Northern Bank of Toledo claimed that it had the right to collect the taxes due to its lien. The Supreme Court held that the lien was valid and that the Northern Bank of Toledo had the right to collect the taxes due to its lien. The Court reasoned that the lien was a valid security for the loan and that the township had no right to collect the taxes due to the lien. The Court also held that the lien was superior to any other claims against the taxes and that the Northern Bank of Toledo had the right to collect the taxes due to its lien. The Court also held that the lien was not affected by the township's attempt to collect the taxes. In conclusion, the Supreme Court held that the lien was valid and that the Northern Bank of Toledo had the right to collect the taxes due to its lien. The Court also held that the lien was superior to any other claims against the taxes and that the Northern Bank of Toledo had the right to collect the taxes due to its lien. The Court also held that the lien was not affected by the township's attempt to collect the taxes.

In Northern Bank of Toledo v. Porter Township Trustees, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a township trustee had authority to borrow money on behalf of the township without obtaining approval from voters. The majority opinion held that such borrowing was not authorized by law and therefore invalid. Justice Field dissented, arguing that it would be unfair for townships to be unable to borrow funds in order to meet their obligations when other municipalities were allowed do so with relative ease. He argued that while there may have been no express authorization for such borrowing, it should still be considered valid because it is necessary for the efficient functioning of local government and has long been accepted as an implied power within Ohio state law. Furthermore, he noted that if this decision were upheld then many townships would suffer financially due to their inability access credit markets like larger cities could easily do so.