The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1860-09-20

end for which the federal government
was formed, and that it OUGHT to hav
The power to pass the acts in question
and that Therefore 1T HAD IT*
The La Cross and Milwaukee railroa
company was NOT, by legislative act
told that 1T MIGHT take payment for it
stocks in mortgages, or that it nigh
traffic that stock for mortgages or an
commodity other than money and be
cause this was NOT done the Court say
that the company had the power to tax
them.-Upon this same principle, tn,
company could take negroes in paymen
tor its stock ; because the charter doe
NOT say that the company MAY DO thu
any more than it does that mortgage
may be taken.
The directors thought the taking pay
ment for stock in mortgages would bt
convenient" and that this would tend
direct y to the building of their railroad
because there was little doubt that they
coul, get SOME money ter these securl.
ties, Ii 1t were ONLY TEN CENTS on the
dollar. That tthey COULD NOT ii soAIH
way get SOME money, it was certain
they never would have ENOUGH to do
this g, eat work that every dollar which
they got tended directly to the accom-
| pllshnent o. the Objecy for which it
| (thc company was created that how
ever LITTLE this might aid, il neverthe-
less be direct ala that man should
remember that mountains are made up
of millions If gralnS-t,at one grain
tends directly to the making of those
mountains.
The Court says that the directors
thought rightly. And its Judgment be,
comes law. If Aaron Burr were now
Hvng he would find il Wisconsin his
doctrine established, that wv hatever is
ooIdiy asserted and pIau,lbly maintain
ed Is law"
The light which The CouJt has thrown
upon The meaning of the words, ''need-
tul, necessary" requisite" essen
ual, Conducive to- and Convene t, -
IS deserving Of more than passing
notice.
1t these are convertible Won DIS. as
the Court holds, it behUuves Legislators
To be cautious IN the selection OF words
| IN their enactments.
These expressions do not all mean
the same thing. There Is, perhaps, no
very marked dIffei ence in the meaning
OF The wO DIS, necessary, needGul, requl.
site and essential. But there is a great
difference between the meanings of
these and those OF conducive to" and
"cOnvenlent."
When person says that a thing is
CONVENIENT, he does not mean that
THAT thing IL necessary, need1ul, requi
site or essential, On the contrary, the
expression conveys the idea tnat the
designated article is NOT necessary,
essential, needfnl or requisite. in the
place or tor tie purpose for which it
lS-or is proposed To be-used; that it
Is a sort of superhulty, overdress, or
thing that could be dispensed with
without endangerlng the growth, pros.
perlty, or existence of any person or
thing. The words CONDUCIVE to-
imply helping, assisting. The idea
which they shadow forth Is that of ac u
mutation which might be dispensed
with wltnout endangerlng growth,
prosperity or existence; but, that il
dispensed with, the growth or prosper
lty might not be SO rapid.
This construction must be admitted to
be correct by every person VINO will al
low himself the pleasure of impartial
reflection The rule OF interpretation is,
that nOntechnlcal words are to be taken
III their common, ordinary or popular
sense as used III the commonwealth OF
letters.
Another rule is, that no strained OF
forced construction SHALL be INDUCED in
tol the pun pose of upholdIng the CLAIM
that particular power Is delegated
Such delegation must always clearly
appear
The Court sustains the power of tho
directors ID G&1 martg lges IN pay
ment for the stock ot the company upon
the ground that The dong 50 Was" con
duciVe TO" the obtaining Of tae MONEY
with winch To pay Tor the Construction
OF The lalIroad and The getting money
1 lor tins purpose Dy dlspuslng OF the
mortgages tended dmecJly to the
construction OF the railway and that it
was a convenient way OF attaining
that object.
Tins Is one sufficient reason in the
opinion ot the Court for Sustaining this
exercise ot power.
Another sufficient reason given by
the Court Is. That tne company
Is not expressly prohibited from
making mortgages III this way. To
hUld tnat THIS can Ue done because not
| pronlOLed, Is To be III direct conflict
vain Lne rute laII down 10y The Court,
tnaU corporation can ex> rcIse those
powers, ana those Only, which are del
oated either expressly, Or lmplIedly.
a tnlrd reason, sut1clc LIT and conclu.
slVc In the logic oI the CuulL Is, that
the leStsla,ure did not declare III what
commodity Tie capital stock OF this
company should be pad.
~ fourth reason, more sufficient and
poslLv iy conclusive Is, The legislature
delegated u the directors The power 10
determine III what commodity, payment
for stock should be made. Certainly
,hls company seems to have been more
than thrice fortunate.
These mortgages could be taken in
payment Tor stock-lst Because the
act was convenient and Conducive to-
the Accomplishment OF the object
sought-2nd. Because the taking OF
the mortgages for the stock was not
prohlblted-.-3d Because the legisla-
ture did not expressly declare in what
TIE pay ment Tor the stock should be
made-4th. Because the Legislature
invested The directors with the power t.
determine III what commodity any part
OF the whole OF the stock should be paid
The Court holds that TINS power of de-
termlnlng IN what commodity stock
should be paid is delegated by The Ian