The Tipton advertiser. [volume] (Tipton, Cedar Co., Iowa) 1856-1962, 1869-01-21
Gin Tiptpn Sarertisfr,
TIPToN, IOWA:
94I,JNsDAY, ..~" JANUARY Il, 1869

--->-----~y~~-~>--~--~-~~--
The County r. r. Bond Question
]. ~ we gave, but short time ago, thu
yist OF the decision of the State Supreme
Court, whereby certain class of bonds
issued by counties for the purpose o
l.ilding railroads were declared to have
been Illegally issued, and therefore nul
and void we propose to give herewith
80 much rs our limited space will per
init OF the decision Of Judge Drummond
Of the United States Circuit Court fol
the Northern District Of Illinois, which
af1irms the validity OF the bonds, and
s.orders the arrest Of the Board OF Super
yisors of Lee county for disobeying the
mandate of the Federal Court requiring
them to levy tax for the purpose OF
paying such bonds.
In refusing to levy, in obedience to
.sthe mandanms Of the Federal Court. the
tax for the payment Of the railroad
bonds, which they had previously been
,enioined not to do by the State Court,
sthe Lee County Supervisors explained
themselves by the following resolutions:
:. ..Rcsolrcd, That we believe our oaths
require us to obey the said injunction
Issued by the Supreme Court of Iowa
and duly SERVED . aforesaid.
= PssolUcti, That We arc therefore una
be 10 comply with the order contained
in said writ of manddmus without VIC
lating the constitution and laws of Iowa
AS construed by the Courts of Iowa;
and also doing violence to our oaths of
office as we understand 1t, and render
ing ourselves liable to punishment for
contempt and violation Of our sworn
duty.
"Rcaolycd, That we earnestly desire
to obey all orders of the courts OF our
country, and do not wish to be in con-
tempt of any, but situated a. we are, we
are compelled to obey said injunction
and decline to levy said tax, and to rely
upon the justice of our government ana
the courts, both STATE und Ecdcr'", Jo'
protection"
The decision Of Judge Drummond
was rendered on II motion for an attach
lncnt against members of this Board Of
Supervisors on the ground that they
had been guilty Of contempt in wilIInlly
disobeying the order Of the Federal
Court.
After rehcarsing the facts in the liti-
IL, Inn lnt Ina 1 a
Court Of the State first decided the
bonds valid, and afterwards reversed
that decision, and quoting the above
resolutions OF the Lee County Board,
Judge Drummond proceeds as follows:
ut was supposed that the dogma con,
tanned in the resolutions just cited, was
exploded by the issue of the late rebel
ion. But 1t seems hydraheaded, and
we now encounter it within the borders
of the patriotic State of Iowa, which
struggled as hard AS any other State to
extirpate it.
at would seem to need no argument
to show that the position taken 10y the
Board of Supervisors of Lee county is
unsound. If tenable, then the Federal
Courts are unclaimed by State author
s ity, and cannot execute their own de.
crees. They act within the States and
upon the people of the States. That is
the very law of their being. Bat it is 4
fundamental principle that within their
sphere they are supreme. Whether OF
not they are in the path pointed out hy
the constitution and law depends, 10y
the very terms OF the instrument lteeil
! upon the adjudcatlons of the Suprcm,
I Court of the United states. Then, whrl
{ that Court, in Il given case, has decided
that the parties should obey the man
date of Federal Court, State court
must Yield This has been the rule from
the foundation of the government. an,
therefore, in certain controversies writ
state to revise its Judgment or decree
under the twenty section Of til
judicial act Of i7eo. 1t is upon In
same principle that the act Of March :
IS 1888, was passed at the time of tn
!, South Carolina troubles. The cour
OF the United States hay
,aoustantly followed it since their organ
!, ization. To take avery recent eXampl
4 The bankrupt law Of 1857, in variol
! ways. mterieres with the proceedings
1 the State courts. BY what right: /
{ virtue of the power in Congress to "e
{ tablish uniform laws on the subject
bankruptcies. Whenever i'll carryiI
out this power, the courts of the Unit
] States act upon the courts Of the Stat
q the latter must give way, and for
simple reason that the authority of I
I former is paramount. 1t must be 30
O. der our system, for it is very clear
| the doctrine now sought to be mainta
D ed by the defendants prevailed geneI
n IL the tie that binds the States, in
* administration of justice at least, wo
bl be severed at once. What, thereto
G. the defendants are required to do in
- ease il nothing new. state courts ;
4 Judges have done it often, and beca
/ they believed their oaths Of office
4 I'ouired 1t under the sixth article Of
Reconstruction, which declares the law
1.-The United States "made in pursua
-.