The miners' express. (Dubuque, Iowa) 1849-1854, 1853-06-08
THE Rail. ROAD

THE RAIL ROAD.
We attach no blame to the editors of the
To- aid, because they could make no ADLER de
rnce of the project of County Subscription,
han tina, which they produced in their yrs,er-
lay 5 issue, written in reply to some remarks Of
'ur own on the rail road If they think !
hat any conclusions, likely to follow the perusal
# our article by calm, reflective minds, hav.
'een met and arrested by their efFuson OF yes
erday, We certainly are content.
1t is worthy Of remark, that neither the edi-
ors Of the Herald nor any one OF the advocates
IF the Dubuque and Pacific Rail Road, have
ever, so far as we know, by speech or pen, pro-
duced even a specious defence Of the great gen
eral principle involved in counties taking stock
in corporations. They have eluded, or attempt
ed 10 break the force of Just and convincing ar.
guments against the principle, by brilliant rep
esentations-sincerelv made, beyond question
and perhaps well founded-of the great and
lasting advantages which will accrue to Du-
buque by the construction of the road That is
to say: ride down an eternal principle of right
and justice for the sake of transient benefit
But, let us remember, meanwhile, that. thoug!
at rare times deviation from the paths of truth
and Justice may secure temporary gain, yet,
that is too surely followed by permanent disad-
vantage.
We are especially 10th at all times to advance
opinions contrary to the views of our fellow citi
their minds, contrary to their interests. Our
information, however, so far, does not permit us
10 think that majority of the people desire
the success of the proposed loan. But that
matters not. We might as well refrain from
advocating our political principles, because in a
minority, as to withhold condemnation of any
public measure merely because a majority Of the
people favored it. 1t was our duty 10 speak out
on this rail road question. Our readers had a
right to know our opinions-our honest opin-
ions, not set got up and advocated because
they might seem to fit the current of the popu-
lar breeze, but because they rest on Justice
these we have given them. We cannot have
done the people wrong in declaring and support
ing our honest convictions. He will not erl
greatly who does his duty according to the lights
Of his reason and the dictates Of his conscience
Though condemned for time, his justification
is deferred, only: it will come. Let US be just
to ourselves and thereby we shall be true to 9th
ers -
"To thy own self he true,
And il must follow, the night the day,
You never can be false 10 any man.
Albeit we have differed-and differed with re.
gret-from many Of those with whose view.
heretofore our own have happily accorded, ye
we are satisfied with our position on this ques-
ton Of County Subscription, eminently ane
conclu lively satisfied. We do not expect to b,
troubled with any latter day regret for havin:
yielded principle to the bugbear Of expediency
The Heraidis correc, in stating that we thinl
the proposed rail road of" no public necessity.
1t is necessary, i, seems, to inform the Herat.
that measure may be highly advantageous ant
profitable, and yet of mo public necessity.
necessity is that which must be, and cal
not be otherwise. Now the proposed rail roat
may give, and we are willing to admit, for tina
matter, that it will give, an increased momen
tum to the prosperity of the county and add
tional vivacity to trade; yet the dullest min,
will see that it is not on that account a neces
sity." tits not absolutely demanded by the want
Of our social organisation, and therefore we op
posed compelling those to contribute to its sup.
port, who do not desire its construction.
The Herald is mistaken when it says there il
but one question at issue in this ma,ter-that is
the consti,u,ionality of County Subscription
There three points involved, upon all o
which our questions of the other day had, t,
our mind, an appropriate bearing, viz:
LIST. Is County Indebtedness not limited BY
the Constitutions?
End Is it right, is it just for a majority o
society to compel the minority TO become stock
holders in corporation, against their will, wher
the corporation is not indispensable to the wants
of the social organization
Sd. Will the erection of the proposed raj
road be public benefit
The last question we yield to the friends o
the measure, although there many VIII.
deny, with earnestness and frmness, any sucl
conclusion.
On the first question, we refer our readers t.
our remarks Of Wednesday, repeating, at til,
same time, that the General Assembly canno
delegate 10 any other body power, withheld
from it by the people in Constitutional Conven
ton. We further say that all powers no
granted by our Constitution are reserved to The
people-to the people in their individual capaci
ty: all individual rights not thereby grantee
away, remain to every one of the people. The
doctrine that, because the Supreme Court viii
decide upon the consttutionality Of the meas
ure, it is not therefore germanc to the issue, hal
no weight with US. We think every mar
should exercise the right of suffrage according
to his conception Of the meaning Of the Con
stituion and laws, as they are, not in accordance
with what he may suppose future decision
of the Supreme Court will be. 1t is the duty
Of every one, be i, spoken with Difference, to
vote according to his construction Of the Com
stitution and the law, that construction being
his control and guide until the proper trbuna
has established the legality of different one.
But even il the supreme court had long be-
fore this time decided the constitutionality Of
county subscription, this could not effect the
matter. The democratic party have long
maintained the unconstitu,onalty Of United
States Bank, in the teeth Of the contrary deci
sion Of the Supreme Court of the United States.
If the power were clearly granted by the Con.
stitution would that sanction the wisdom Of its
exercise May it not be constitutional to do
that which would be unsafe, unwise, and inju-
rious' May not constitutions and laws be
opposed to abstract justice? Clearly, yes
Shall we not then oppose projects which, though
legal, are destructive in their tendencies, which
are not founded in justice sound policy p