The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1858-08-12
The Governor, the Land Grant Compa.
nies, AID the Supreme Court.

A difference Of opinion exists between the
Land Grant Railroad Companies and the
Governor, relative TO the character Of one
class Of securities which the former are re-
quired to deposit before being entitled to
receive the State loan provided for in the
amendment to the Constitution, which was
adopted by the people on the 18th Of April
last. This amendment, after reciting vari
Gus securities which must be given as a pre-
requisite TO the issue Of State bonds, adds
land as further security, an amount Of
first mortgage bonds, on the roads, lands,
and franchises, Of the respective companies,
corresponding to the State bonds issued,
shall be transferred to the Treasurer Of the
State" &c.
The Companies, on the one hand, claim
that this requirement is satisfied, when they
transfer TO the State, out OF the first mort
gage bonds issued for the construction Of
their roads, an amount equal to that receiv-
cd from the State which bonds can be is
sued to any sum required TO construct their
entire lines Of road, and which shall contain
no priority of lien in favor of the State
over other creditors of the Companies.
Gov. SIBLEY, on the other hand, contends
that the State is entitled to first and pre-
ierred lien, over all other creditors, and that
the railroad bonds to be deposited by the
Companies must insure this preference in
order to entite them to the loan authorized
by the Constitution.
The Senate, yesterday, in order, we pre-
sumo, to adjust this difference OF opinion
passed resolution calling upon the JUS
tees of the Supreme Court for their con-
struction Of the meaning of the constitutional
clause in controversy. This request is
preferred under authority of an old Terrific
rial law, which permits tbs singular, and
as We think. improper mode Of procedure
The rule is almost universal, that Courts
when thus appealed to, refuse to respond. 1t
is always time to decide legal proposition
when il comes before a court in necessary
and legitimate manner Judicial d,cta, even
when uttered in the decision OF cause,
carry with them but little weight, and no
authority. We should be sorry to see our
Supreme Justices inaugurating a system
which may lead to unpleasant consequences,
and which, in this case would wear the look
of an unwarrantable interference with the
functions Of the Executive branch Of the
government. The Governor is provided by
law with all officer to whom he can refer in
casss OF doubt upon any point of duty. II
in the case under consideration, he is clear
as to the correctness of his position the act
of thrusting before him an extra Judicial
opinion OF the Justices of the Supreme
Court, would very properly be treated by
him as a legislative and judicial imperti-
nence. The Governor is alone responsible
Tor his official acton in this as in any other
matter and We presume, therefore, that he
will act upon his own Judgment and not
permit himself TO be influenced by outside
pressure of any kind. even if it should come
clothed in the ermne Of the Supreme
Bench.
We express no opinion upon the correct
ness OF the construction given by either
party; We simply write agains, the mode
proposed Of inducing one department, OF the
government to influence in an improper
manner the judgment, aud action OF another
independent and coordinate department.