, 1869-03-29
Lee County. Town, CnRe-Anothes
Letter from n SupcxS1sors
Err u Anrsnk. InNn- March e 1860.

l am QDllGcQ 3Qu IuE JUL A44uAC2a - 1NHAA*-
ting into your columns my letter Of the 18th lust,
and fos your courteous end dtspasstonAtc discus
sion Of thr questions involved In the rntroad bond
1itI9asiou do not wish to prot.nct the DISCUSSION
Of thoee questions In your paper, but 40 thlok
that If they 30 before the people the facts ought to
I've freely and fairly stated It fs not surprising
that ypu bho1ld hare = Misrepresentation OF the
tarts You well know that, comparatively, trivial
circumstance may cut quito m important nsuse IN
. great suit
,ette- in the main seemed to be IN the right spirit
think ca1 call your attention to certain facts
which oucht to have appeared IN It, and would
hare entirely changed your conclusiuns And
Leg brief space In 5our paper to do 80.
Ycu say that tho point whether the State Court
Injunction relieves the Supervisors Of obedience to
the s,,asddnsu issued By Judge Drunmond, ts not
m omen 1ueat*on, having been decided Ii the case
of Wehery :. Leo County, 8 Wallace 91o. You quote
from that caso to this eject that staie Courts can
not eatotn the process or proceedings Of tho United
States CourtA
Tia, is connect, u the United State4 courts fra
acoutrc Jurisdiction But If the State courts fra
ncauirc jurisdiction the Unted States courts ca1
not tn nv nannes Interfere with the exercise Of
that Jurisdiction. All lawyers know this PROPOSE
ton to be the Law.
revartt 10 the facta OF that case: Attention to
the fac.s Of tho casc Us stated viii show that the
questions presented for decision arc the samc as
those tKtgs decided In the preceding ca4e." The
rrecedlnR case ls Hi&Xs vB johnson County, md By
narc lts .ou viii md that tbs a,paty sraa tn
;otue,i bu nit commenced AFTER EGJs h1d obtdfned
hi. j.sdpmrat
In an Aal.ras c~pxs proceedings before Judge
Beck, ~ Informed you IN my former Letter, Il
wns shown tsy the proper records, that the Super
yisor. wcrc entotncd ny a suit commenced moro
than two ycara before Thompson commenced hls
eu.t on the bonda Therefore. your position. that
the question Ia not open, not correct
You will admit, that II the State Court had
Jurisdiction Of the Injunction Rule and the lawful
authority to prohibit the collection Of t1Iea TO pay
the bonds, the Uuited Etatee Court ca4ld not A.
forwards step IN and compel their collection
The court that nrst obtained Jurisdiction nst hold
It to the exclusion Of the ether.
The roiut VIA not made By the fBcts, nor de.
| c1leA by the United States Supreme Court n
Weber r. Lcc County. md no lawyer can zee,
when II Is .nale, how that court CAL hold that 4
! a,antotnu& action TO enforce Judgments rendered
in suits commenced more than TWO Jeaf1 after the
Injunction suit can rutlf5 decree rendered
| therein.
/ No respectable lawrer In America Will dispute
the fact that the Supreme Court Of lows hAi tht
rightful authority jurisdiction and power to tnt
and tmprtson, OF otherwise punlAh, tho Super
vIsara for any violation Of the tntuno
| ton deere, up 10 the ttmc Thomson oh
! taincd his rarrdamus wit, In July, 1868
| There arc eve years, then, tho State Court hi
| updpubted Jurisdiction over It's own Judgment
/ And during ali thAi time no Federal Court coul,
have interfe.cd Or ANY 1c<A principle, to rclicv,
the Supervisors from any punishment the Supscm'
Court Of the State might have imposed upon them
The Stsie Co1ft, having lad such jurisdiction
| and authority 1lnrtn8 that time, viii !ou tel m
how It Is deprived Of Its power nov: Yop VT
not noswcr by sat!ug thst Circuit Court Of tn
United States may aet a1de, hnnul and utterly re
| uut}tssc a Judgment rendered tn due form ant
under all the solemnittes Of law By the h.Shcs
! tribunal Of State
A STATE Court has no right whatever, un,ess
l has the right 70 enforre and require the world +
respect Its rnrcvc1scd decisions rendered In ezs
arising within Its turtsdictlonsi IfmitA
The Supreme Court Of the United States has d
r9htfu1 authority to rcEcrsc the Judgments OF tn
highest courts Of 4 State On questions Gnvptvtn
the construction Of the State Constitution Al
| local 1--WE uuleAs such constitution and Stale law
cnantet with the National Constitution ct PofeFz
1aws Therefore the question Of validity Or ttsatt
Of onr railroad bonds Hu8t be determined by tn
laws and Constitution oi the State- And L 10
| ran show Us that in this Legal controversy wc Al
acting IN opposition to any provision Of the Fe1ers
Constitution, CT law Of Congress. touching tn
CHARACTER Of these bonds as conuactt, coRmc1cl,
/ naoer. or In my othcs Way, however remotely. y
Tt At pucc yield the contest, and make auy salt.
mir acknowledgement Of ou e1sos.
| rhn question u o1c OF grave import, and ucs1
| r,,m. srr,ous md dbpaasiouAte argument 4
nrcsrnted bs the Circuit Court of nl1not1 It L
rnlvrx the interesting inquiry; Mar tho FtEles
| fnnrtx undermine the jurisdiction md utterly d
-rr,r1l the Judgments Of the highest couSts OF
| atst4 without permission Of the National Consut1
| ton and lawa!
learned and eminent In the Cnloa. It Il compose
of honorable men, able md profound ludE'
~ ,ow Thty nave given It - their dcifbers!
oran,on. amer long and thorough tnvesttgAdo
| ~ ,hssn r4Ifroad bonds were inhibited bJ Il
stat. f,onstitutiou, and consttuH no naeosedne
| .r,,,s. mn couptT. And IN This decision III
hsIe onty followed the opinions Of slx Of their ps
| decrssnx It,x now nearly nine yc31s hnee II
const,r,et.on Of ouf constitution WAS ta1o
Ana " thr honds are forbidden by the oonsutnuf
,ou I'LL readily admit thAt no Fosc OF .ae p.op'
OF act Of the Legislature eau MAKE tneu w ~ -.
| Now. instead OF gtrtaS u eaalp tss' sas,n.1 =,
sun,,,nr Cnur. Of the Cnlted States or inc
pscme Court Of Iowa, is clothed win au1no.a3
! conss1ue pur State Constitution On tnlA qaeeAoN'
Are the people Of the Ststc o1 naaos c.s.ss -. :,
make the Supreme Court Of the tnlEea s
anal a1tater upon the question OF 1ne ~. ~
Of tholr constitution? {ou arc not feaot 'os ~
; Jet- And do not AK u 10 submit to "naa !oo
= Illinois will not accept.
! Rut you intimate that our people ate not aout
IND repudlast thetf obligations The question
- ! fore the court4 Is not one Of morals But, =
meet IN that light and leave It 10 you to settle
! u Answering this question. Suppose majority