Daily Democrat and news. [volume] (Davenport, Iowa) 1859-1864, 1861-07-15

ANoTHEa LICK AT Iowa BoNDs.-The
New York Herald of the 18th inst. con.
tains the following correspondence con-
corning Iowa Bonds
NEW YoRK, July 10.
Certain good citizens Of Iowa are dis
pleased with the course Of the Herald
on the subject of Iowa bonds. They
take some pains to explain, and quote
Judge from Illinois. In 1853 the Su-
preme Court of Iowa held that county
had the constitutional right to aid in
building railroad, and that section ia
o. the Code applied to or included rail-
roads. In 1855 the General Assembly
provided (sec. p that whenever a rail-
road should have received bonds Of any
city or county upon stock subscription,
the rate OF interest should be, etc. The
same Legislature passed law restricting
judges and other officers as to the issue
Of such bondo. THUS the Legislature
confirmed the views Of the Supreme
Court as to section ia, applying to rail.
roads as well as to other roads. la 1857
the Supreme Court held that tie ques.
ton of legality Of county subscriptions
for railroads had been denied, aad the
decision would be adhered to. The bona
tide holder must be protected. To 1868
the Supreme Court adhered to the same
decision, and said that subject would not
again be discussed. After a time the
creation Of indebtedness became SO
alarming, and the tendency to repudiate
SO decided, that in the new constitution
u CLAUSE was inserted 10 legalize the
amounts Issued, and at the same time to
restrict further issues. In 1859 the Su-
prcme Court of Iowa held that section
ia was not to apply TO railroad, and
that when i1unctions against the issue
OF bonds took place before the bonds
reached the hands Of bona Jfde holders
the issue could be enjoined. The cou,t
same term-held that where bonds
had passed into the hands of bona tile
holders they were valid and binding.
Thus. till 1859, the Legislature and
courts OF Iowa upheld the bonds so long
as it suited. How now: 10 1851 the
State courts and the federal court in
Iowa reversed all former decisions. The
United States Judge decides, 10 direct
opposition to the United States Supreme
Court, decisions in suits OF Bondholders
VS.. Knox d. Co., Indiana and Pittsbure
city. The late decisions are judicial
reputation Of conditions 10 the face OF
prior judicial confirmation in same and
similar contracts by the highest tribu-
nal In the country. Now ask if-when
Supreme Court has for years confirm.
ed issues of bonds, and when the United
States Supreme Court rules that such is
sues in bona .fae holders hands are
good, and that the debtor cannot plead
his own fault and neglect in exclamation
Of the debt-under these circumstances
future court can upset all that has
been done since 1855, where is the Sc
curity in any bond in Iowa! We sim
ply see that an elective judiciary affords
no security, and we cannot see that an
elective State government can or will
afford better security. II the atmos-
phere OF Iowa is SO poisoned II public
opinion forces them TO reverse repeated
decisions of their highest tribunals, what
guarantee have we that public opinion
will not force the State authorities, soon
er or later, to repudiate the proposed
war debt. When judges and courts hole
office at the good will Of the people, it
becomes high time for the creditor, or
proposed creditor, to inquire closely In
to the antecedents Of his proposed debt
or. What are the antecedents Of the
people Of Iowa. Let the history Of Du.
buque, Lee, Muscatine, Darlington, etc.,
answer.
ONE OF THE BITTEN OxHs.
ALL the roDoits ahout the nurAhaaa