The daily Gate City. [volume] (Keokuk, Iowa) 1855-1916, 1869-01-16

The Burlington Hark-Eye says with ref
erencs to Judge Drummond's decision:


This conflict of authority is indeed unfort unate,
vexstieus and expensive. 1t il one, ALSO that do
serves iths calm consideration Of our people. Tn
questonsbly The pespDe Of the various counties,
who believe their railroad bonds to have been
fraudulently or unlawfuIiy issued, and are not .
Just claim, have the right to resist their payment
to the full extent Of the law. When they have
done this, they have done all they can consistent
~ or justifably do. When it comes to ! direct
conflict between tho couIts Of the StatA and those
of the United ststes-when Boards Of Supervi
sors are commanded by The Supreme Court Of the
United States to do thing, and by State
court 10 do another--thsy cannot ecnpiy With
both, and they must elect the one Of the two that
they propose to obey.
The United States Constitution declares that il
and the laws made in pursuance thereof shah b.
the supreme law Of the land. anything in the Con
stitution or laws Of any State to the contrary not
outstanding. As to what Ii }a,e the Supreme
Court Of the United States is the ultimate authors
ity, md its decisions binding until duly re-
versed BY the people acting lawfully in their SOW
ereign capacity.
WsAohel understand it to be the purpose u
any ~ Of She people Of lows to foscibiy rseist
the - aesxpouaded by the highsst judicial ~
thority of the land. Whether some corporation.
have not already gone too far In deciding to stand
by the Ststs courts rs against those Of the United
States, and virtually treating the latter with con
tempt, may be questioned. If the contest q il
now exists be continued on both Sides there can
scarcely be two opinions to the ultimate result
The 6Aole csnrte mset Yield. Iowa, having sAed
nash ~ her best blood TO establish the supreme
authority Of the dene,a Government, and to ex-
plode the baneful doctrine Of estate rights" 40
called, wiz not nov array herself ssainst that 50
prsns sufhority, nor assert herself powers and
privileges which she has denied to Others We
warn the people against assuming . position
which viii act only insure defeat, but paisfnl "
initiation.
The Davenport Gazette, Scott county hav-
ing issasd bonds - Lee ccnnsydid publishes
Judge DIS decision, ard says:
Prom about the year 1850 and up to 1858. =
number u he counties Of this Stats. and anon
them oAr own, Issued their bonds to aid in con-
structing sailsoads, taking in exchange therefor,
stock in The railroads The qusasion - 70 TIC W
hdity Of these bonds soon found its way into the
Courts, and in > number ~ dseiasons, sommenc.
ing with Dubuque County ~. the Dubuque and
Pacific Railroad Company, 4 Grssns i, assided in
1883, end ending with the State r.. the Board Of
Equalization OF the Cemty Of JshnsoH, 10 IovN.
157, dssiAa1 iadste 80 eight tdsisisnsi1 ali
ths bao0t $50 edeclod 10 be coeasitatioeal and
vah1 ~ II = ~ thS C0urs were moi u shiuhous
but hevertheless the decisions became The law Of
the State. Or rather dsclsxsd uhaatAs law ~ the
STATE was in regard to the bonds. II was during
,hisleriod T hartion'AsA .lyUt.tn ofths
In 1882 In the case of the State Of lows FER rel.
r.. The County Of Wapello, our Court for the nrst
time held thssssA pnds 10 - inyalN, nd A.ye 40
continued to hold them, down 10 tho recent d.c;..
ion lately publishsd in the ,Gasetts. 500
In the msaatims In 1853 the question CANE mn
In the S1pfene Court Of the nibed Stsfes inthe
case Of deipcfe e. the City of Dubuque, and that
Court following the earlier decisions Of this State.
affirmed the validity or the bonds, and have a.
hersd 10 that decision in several cases sIpcA Hs.h
y brieny the judicial history Of tho question, Tn
DERIVING, however, the legal aspect of III aues-
tion there IL We think . moral one, and through
that Ne think the shortest and best solution ma
be found. There are cersainiy grave doubts upon
INC eCsss a question, and We are with or
but 10 the position they have a.sumed snen a.
question, We are disposed 10 think they are not
wholly correct. In cAsss bfou eht befora th.r, q,
decision, they ars supreme And must de.;ds :. !.
them seems the NV. That is their nro,i...
But whoa tAsy sassns 70 decide cssss ao4 below
them. when they sssh 70 prevent the Unit.S
States 0ossts nom carrying out their m.ndas..
thus periling the psacs and Afsty of the Sat,
and plunginG No into civil va, ~ cannot ~
will not fellow thsm. They then 70 beyond 90
duty and their rights and it is for the ctia,ss .
determiss slesest sAsk cssrss isas WIS., sas =.
not. bnt = We said, the question il nes alto
gs.nef q kv- Ihs0 lads vsn iaued ~ - |
soti.ts4 rhsn or oo1Sts had dsei1eA (Aeh 70 -
valid fazkss 49, them upsnt hs hdtA ~ thA.
.1pes''iTn Of the law, and paid thsir money for
them. - tiAansst dideat3 Of eooaDun hso>stv
somPei 70 .ne opinion that sscA boads shosld b.
para. alue, me esads may Mvs slsss fsolishly
~. .us P.o'ssss may have been squasdsred,
to the counties, and many coa.ids,.so.. n . .n.
l.1 eh:, nc may occur to u' ha. il 10 Is.
duty OF the supreme Cont to Aslp patti. a.. ~
disAdvantAgeous and foolish contracts th., -. 81
may have made, the sooner We increase the NM
Der OF The Judges III better, for the labor !.
Herculsan.
We are disposedto advise the paymen, o th,,,
bonds. ard tAasv the Board Of Supervisors IN the
several c,untsss 4sneegeset ~ nasdstes Of De
fsirly decided Agaipee tbeu 81 ths higAest eo.rtI
known b oat hks tn ~kels po~er Of the Pad /
sral Gevsrnusnt can b., and viii b isyoks1 -
lid Of the court Neither do We take counsel Of
'uf fears. bSt ~ jodeasat u the Fedssrl CSSr1v
must ~ obsted, md neither the Supreme Court
4 lows psraalfAs Sussss - ~ State can PR
ont then from esing carried into effect, The
'lace to esny on this contest II II is to Be carried